Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2016 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (3) TMI 38 - HC - CustomsValidity of Show cause notice issued to 3rd respondent - Period of limitation - Recovery of Duty drawback for the period from October 1999 to December, 2002 - Rule 16 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995 read with Section 75A(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 - Show cause notice is based upon an alleged intelligence received by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, that prior to the year 2004, the noticee had indulged in misuse of brand rate of duty drawback scheme by availing higher rate of duty drawback, which was fixed for bicycles of various sizes/ weights but had actually exported bicycles of smaller sizes/ weights and had thus availed inadmissible drawback- Issue of limitation raised by the petitioner for the same. Held that: Since only a show cause notice has been issued and final order in response thereto is yet to be passed, we are of the considered view that all the contentions raised herein can be effectively gone into by the 3rd respondent on consideration of the reply to the show-cause notice which may further be supplemented by the petitioner alongwith the decisions in Spectra Fashions versus Union of India [2015 (1) TMI 1261 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] Rashmi Metaliks Ltd. vs. Union of India [2015 (6) TMI 332 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT], Indsur Global Limited versus Union of India [2014 (12) TMI 585 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT], Padmini Exports versus Union of India [2013 (1) TMI 282 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] Also, it is Needless to say that the issue of limitation raised by the petitioner would surely require consideration at the hands of 3rd respondent who shall be obligated to deal with the same by passing a reasoned order. Therefore, writ petition is disposed of at this stage with liberty to the petitioner to submit a supplementary reply to the show-cause notice, whereupon the 3rd respondent shall pass a reasoned order after hearing the petitioner's representative and respondent No.3 shall be obligated to deal with the question of limitation in addition to the merits of the matter. - Decided in favour of petitioner
|