TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 804X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TS PARTNER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [ 2019 (9) TMI 970 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] and M/S JAIRATH INTERNATIONAL AND ANR. AND RAJESH DHANDA VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [ 2019 (10) TMI 642 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT ] are raised - In both judgments, we have held that inspite of availability of alternative remedy available under 1962 Act, writ petition is maintainable in view of involvement of pure questions of law as well jurisdiction and law enunciated by Hon ble Supreme Court and followed by this court time and again. While taking cue from Sections 28, 28AAA 75 of 1962 Act and relying upon judgment of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise versus Larsen and Toubro [2015 (8) TMI 749 - S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exported textile garments claiming benefit of duty drawback as permissible under Duty Drawback Rules, 1995, which were framed vide Notification No. 37/95-CUS (NT) dated 26.05.1995, in exercise of power conferred by Section 75 of Customs Act, 1962 (for short 1962 Act ), Section 37 of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and Section 93A of the Finance Act, 1994. As required under Section 50 of the 1962 Act, the Petitioners as and when exported goods filed shipping bill declaring description, quantity, value, name of foreign buyer etc. A team of Custom Officers i.e. Inspector, Superintendent and Assistant Commissioner physically verified export goods. The goods were examined and assessed in terms of Section 17 of the 1962 Act. It w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 of Drawback Rules, 1995. 4. Counsel for the Petitioners has raised three issues namely (i) Effect of repeal of duty drawback rules 1995 w.e.f. 01.10.2017 (ii) Absence of mechanism to raise demand of duty drawback and (iii) Power of Respondent to reassess value of goods already exported. 5. After having scrutinized record of the case and heard arguments of both sides, we find that issues raised in present petitions are squarely covered by our judgment dated 20/09/2019 in Famina Knit Fabs Vs UOI, 2019-TIOL-2208-HC-P H-Cus and judgment dated 04.10.2019 in Jairath International and another Vs UOI CWP No. 702 of 2017 . 6. In the present writ petitions, concededly identical questions as r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich have already been exported out of country, however keeping in view law laid by Hon ble Supreme Court recently in the case of ITC Vs Commissioner of Central Excise 2019-TIOL-418-SC-CUS-LB, we in the case of Jairath International and another Vs UOI CWP No. 702 of 2017 decided on 4.10.2019 have held that Respondent has no power to reassess value of goods already exported. 7. Thus in view of our findings in the case of Famina Knit Fabs Vs UOI 2019-TIOL-2208-HC-P H-Cus and Jairath International and another Vs UOI CWP No. 702 of 2017 decided on 4.10.2019 , the present writ petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, writ petition is allowed and impugned show cause notice dated 31.7.2014 qua Petitioners is hereby q ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
