TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 885X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation is filed by Commissioner of Custom, Air Cargo Export, New Custom House, New Delhi against the order-in-appeal No. CC(A)Cus/396/08, dated 15-10-08 passed by Commissioner of Customs (Appeal), NCH, New Delhi with respect to order-in-original No. 05/2008, dated 11-6-2008 passed by Assistant Commissioner (Drawback), NCH, New Delhi. 2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s. Kankish Exports filed a drawback claim of Rs. 2,15,371/- under Section 74 of the Customs Act, 1962 on 20-11-2003. The party claimed to have imported Readymade Garments and paid duty of Rs. 2,53,378/- which were re-exported. As per Section 74 of the Customs Act, 1962 when any goods capable of being easily identified which have been imported into India and upon which any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issioner of Customs (Appeals) by the Assistant Commissioner (DBK) as per the Commissioner of Customs (Review) order No. 10/2008, dated 4-8-08. The Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) rejected the department appeal vide Order-in-Appeal No. CC(A)Cus/396/08, dated 15-10-08. 3. Being aggrieved by the impugned order-in-appeal, the applicant has filed this revision application under Section 129DD of Customs Act, 1962 before Central Government on the following grounds : 3.1 The drawback claim of the party was sanctioned by the Assistant Commissioner (DBK) under Section 74 of the Customs Act, 1962 as the identity of the basis of examination report recorded on the reverse of S/B No. 002976, dated 17-9-2003, which was signed by the Shed Inspector a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... respect to the import documents, which was not done. 3.4 Now, when the goods have been exported, the Assistant Commissioner (Drawback) cannot establish the identity of the goods merely with respect to documents. For identification of goods, presence of goods and the documents both are required. 3.5 Since, the identity should be established before export which has not been done in this case. The identity should be deemed to have not been established. Therefore, the drawback sanctioned by the Assistant Commissioner (Drawback) under Section 74 of the Customs Act, 1962 is recoverable from the party. 4. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the respondent vide letter F.No. 380/14/DBK/09-RA, dated 16-4-09 under Section 129DD of Customs Act, 196 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner Export Shed only as contended by department. As such Commissioner (Appeal) did not find any merit in the appeal of department and therefore rejected the same. 8. Government agrees with the findings of the Commissioner (Appeal). Moreover, as per examination report on the reverse of Shipping Bill the identity of goods is established. The customs examination report is not disputed by department. The file was not put up by Supdt. (Export Shed) to Assistant Commissioner (Export Shed) for counter signature of examination report. So it is a lapse on the part of Custom Supdt. The export-respondent cannot deprived of the substantial monetary benefit for some lapse on the part of Custom Officer. Since, Assistant Commissioner (Drawback) has sat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
