2010 (2) TMI 356 - HC - Customs

Drawback Rules- whether an exporter can claim duty drawback at its maximum permitted level even when in the hands of a class of importers the customs duty paid is found to be at a lesser rate and not the full rate of duty as is normally paid by all other classes of importers. Held that- such question not answered either by counsel for petitioner or by commissioner himself. Commissioner directed to provide High Court the statutory provisions in the Act the relevant rules and all Board Circulars governing them complied them in paperbook.

Summary

Issues: Interpretation of provisions of Section 75 and Section 76 of the Customs Act, 1962 for duty drawback on exported goods; Eligibility of exporters and importers for duty drawback benefit; Claiming duty drawback when raw material has not suffered customs duty; Maximum permitted level of duty drawback for exporters.

Analysis:
1. The judgment concerns the interpretation of the provisions of Section 75 and Section 76 of the Customs Act, 1962, specifically related to the allowance of duty drawback on exported goods. The court expressed doubts regarding the application of these provisions, particularly in light of the Customs and Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995, and various related rules such as Rule 3, Rule 6, Rule 8, Rule 11, Rule 13, and Rule 15. The court sought clarity on the extent to which duty drawback can be allowed and the circumstances under which it applies.

2. Another issue raised in the judgment is the eligibility criteria for exporters and importers to claim duty drawback benefits. The court questioned whether an exporter who has not imported the raw material and exported goods, or an importer who has not paid customs duty at the time of import, can still claim duty drawback. Additionally, the court pondered if duty drawback can be claimed even if the imported raw material did not incur any customs duty upon importation.

3. The judgment also delves into the question of whether an exporter can claim duty drawback at the maximum permitted level, especially when certain classes of importers have paid customs duty at a reduced rate compared to the standard duty rate. The court sought clarification on this matter, as it remained unanswered by the counsel for the petitioner-Department or the Commissioner who appeared before the court to explain the relevant rules and board circulars.

4. Furthermore, the court highlighted the need for a comprehensive understanding of the duty drawback scheme. Despite the Commissioner's explanations and the approval of the Finance Ministry regarding the written submissions presented, the court expressed dissatisfaction with the lack of clarity. The court requested the presence of the architects of the rules or relevant authorities to explain the duty drawback scheme, its historical functioning, and the current government's stance on the issue. Additionally, the court directed the Commissioner to compile all statutory provisions, relevant rules, and board circulars in a paper book for better comprehension of the scheme.

5. In conclusion, the court scheduled a follow-up hearing to address the unresolved queries and requested the learned counsel to ensure the submission of necessary documents for a thorough examination of the duty drawback scheme. The judgment reflects the court's commitment to understanding the intricacies of duty drawback regulations and ensuring clarity on the application of relevant provisions for exporters and importers.