2002 (3) TMI 76

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re no separate rules to deal with Central Excise component of drawback and customs component of drawback and Section 75 of the Customs Act, 1962 was amended in 1991 itself making realisation of sale proceeds as a condition for drawback. 3.M/s. Sarswati Exports vide their letter dt. 2-1-2002 made the following submissions : "That the original adjudicating authority has ignored the Govt. of India's orders cited as applicable case laws; that the applicant Commissioner has erred in arriving at the opinion that the Govt. of India's Order No. 637/99 is not applicable in the present case; that the authority to make rules is derived distinctly and discretely from Sec. 75 of Customs Act, 1962 and Sec. 37 of Central Excise Act, 1944. Sec. 75 of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ten submissions made by the applicant and the respondent. The Central Govt. framed the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules in exercise of the power conferred upon it under Sec. 75 of Customs Act, 1962 and Sec. 37 of Central Excise Act, 1944. These are composite rules in terms of which drawback is allowed in relation to the customs duty as well as central excise duties. There are no separate rules to deal with central excise component of drawback and customs component of drawback. Both components are dealt with under the very same drawback rules mentioned above. 5.The word 'Drawback' is defined under Rule 2(a) of Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules. According to this definition drawback in relation to any goods m....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... realized. 10.Govt. is of the opinion that the proviso of Sec. 75 and the machinery provisions which have been framed subsequently in the year 1995 do not impose any limitation for initiating such recoveries. The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the matter of M/s. Eternit Everest v. Union of India [1997 (89) E.L.T. 28 (Mad.)] while examining the show cause notice issued under the Sec. 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for recovery of the sum due to the Govt. in terms of the provisions of Sec. 11D observed that the proceedings in the nature of show cause notice under Sec. 11A of the Act are not invocable. However, the Hon'ble Court held that liability under Sec. 11D is not wiped out and is enforceable as and when such machinery provision is....