Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2019 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 642 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURTRecovery of duty drawback incentive availed at the time of export - power to reassess shipping bill - Rule 16 of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995 - Free on Board (FOB) value of the goods exported during 2007-08 to 2012-13 rejected - definition of ‘export goods’ - application of Valuation Rules, 2007 to exported goods. HELD THAT:- It is apparent from the definition of ‘export goods’ that the goods which have already been taken out of India do not remain export goods instead are referable as exported goods. The definition of ‘imported goods’ makes things more than clear that goods which have already been cleared are not “imported goods”. Similarly, goods which have already been exported are no more ‘export goods’. In the definition part as well in the various Sections of 1962 Act and Rules made thereunder, we find that word ‘imported goods’ or ‘export goods’ has been used which shows true intention of the legislature. The transaction value of imported and export goods is the thumb rule to determine duty payable, however declared value may be rejected and proper officer may redetermine value applying Valuation Rules, 2007. Rule 1(3) provides that Valuation Rules, 2007 are applicable to ‘export goods’ and not goods which have already been taken out of India. The declared value may be accepted or reassessed and in case re-assessed value is not accepted by exporter, proper officer has to pass speaking order - Thus, as per scheme of the 1962 Act, department is not remediless and courts are bound to interpret law as such. Courts while interpreting law can neither add nor subtract any word from the plain language irrespective of consequences. It is the legislature who has to rectify, repair or amend the law in case any judgment interpreting law is not acceptable or is contrary to intent and purport of enactment. On plain reading of Section 17, 50 and 51 with Valuation Rules, 2007, we find that Respondent is neither vested with power of reassessment of goods already exported under Rule 16 of Drawback Rules, 1995 nor Valuation Rules, 2007. The goods which stand exported do not fall within ambit of ‘export goods’ as defined under Section 2(19) of 1962 Act, thus Respondent cannot invoke Rule 6 & 8 of Valuation Rules, 2007 - Respondent in terms of Rule 16 of Drawback Rules, 1995 as well Valuation Rules, 2007 has no power to reassess a shipping bill which was duly assessed by proper officer at the time of export of goods. In the present case, goods in question stood exported thus impugned order is not sustainable. Petition allowed.
|