TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 320X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d when the said RBI circulars and provisions of FTP 2009-14 were in force and Rule 16A(5) did not exist. The detailed findings of lower authorities regarding recovery of drawback amount in view of the said RBI circulars have also not been challenged by the applicant and Government finds that such findings of lower authorities and orders thereof continue to hole ground. Recovery of drawback with appropriate interest confirmed - Decided against the appellant. - F. No. 373/359/DBK/14-RA - 22/2015-Cus - Dated:- 30-7-2015 - Ms. Rimjhim Prasad, Joint Secretary Shri Derrick Sam, Advocate, for the Assessee. None, for the Department. ORDER This revision application is filed by M/s. Texport Industries Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as applicant) against the Order-in-Appeal No. CMB-CEX-OOO-APP-110/2014, dated 9-9-2014 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise Service Tax (Appeals), Tiruchirapalli with respect to Order-in-Original passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Drawback), Customs House, Tuticorin. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant has exported goods for an amount of ₹ 64,33,993/- covered under Ship ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner (Appeals) has erred in acting on pre-amended Rule 16A. He also erred in holding that sub-rule (5) of Rule 16A introduced on 11-4-2014 cannot have retrospective effect for the exports made in 2008. 4.3 The applicant submits that amendments made which are beneficial to the assessee can have retrospective effect. In the case of CCE v. Mysore Electrical Industries [2006 (204) E.L.T. 517 (S.C.)] the issue was whether the ruling under Rule 37B of the Central Excise Act issued by the Board re-classifying the Single Panel Circuit Breakers under CTH 85.37 as against the previously approved. The applicant submits that the rationale of the said judgment has to be applied not only to Board s ruling under Section 37B of the Central Excise Act or Circular but also to notifications amending the rule thereby granting benefit to the assessee. After all a ruling under Section 37B has statutory effect. A blinkered view of the above judgments of the Apex Court is repugnant to the settled interpretation of statutory provisions. What is to be seen is the ratio decided in the judgment. 4.4 The applicant submits that this question was considered by Himachal Pradesh High Court in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocate attended hearing on behalf of the applicant. Nobody attended the hearing on behalf of the department. The Department vide their written submission dated 4-12-2014 mainly reiterated contents of impugned Orders. 6. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records, oral written submissions and perused the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-in- Appeal. 7. On perusal of the records, Government observes that the original authority confirmed the demand of already sanctioned drawback under Rule 16A of the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995, Section 8 of FEMA, 1999 and RBI Circulars read with proviso to Section 75(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the ground that the applicant failed to realize sale proceeds in respect of impugned exports. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld impugned Order-in-Original. Now, the applicant has filed this Revision Application on grounds mentioned in Para (4) above. 8. Government notes that the applicant has contended that though they failed to realize foreign remittance, their loss was compensated by Export Credit Guarantee Corporation (ECGC) and their authorized dealer Canara Bank wrote off the requirement of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (42 of 1999), but such non-realisation of sale proceeds is compensated by the Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India Ltd. under an insurance cover and the Reserve Bank of India writes off the requirement of realisation of sale proceeds on merits and the exporter produces a certificate from the concerned Foreign Mission of India about the fact of non-recovery of sale proceeds from the buyer, the amount of drawback paid to the exporter or the claimant shall not be recovered. F. No. 605/39/2010-DBK (Rajesh Kumar Agarwal) Under Secretary to the Government of India Note. - The principal rules were published vide notification No. 37/95-Customs (N. T.), dated the 26th May, 1995, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section 3, Sub-section (i), vide number G.S.R.441(E), dated the 26th May, 1995, and was last amended by notification number 9/2011-Customs (N. T.), dated the 10th February, 2011 vide number G.S.R. 80(E), dated the 10th February, 2011. The important aspects of the said Notification No. 30/2011, dated 11-4-2011, by which said sub-rule (5) of Rule 16A was introduced are a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of ITC Ltd. v. CCE, New Delhi [2004 (171) E.L.T. 433 (S.C.)] and Paper Products Ltd. v. CC [1999 (112) E.L.T. 765 (S.C.)] that simple and plain wording of applicable statutory provisions as elaborated vide relevant Notifications/Circular are to be strictly adhered to and no liberal interpretation is permissible. 8.4 In view of the above, Government holds that as Rule 16(A)(5) of the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995, as amended, was made effective w.e.f. 11-4-2011 only and all export proceeds due to be realized prior to this date would not be covered by the relaxation provided thereunder. The provision of sub-rule (5) of Rule 16(A) ibid have rightly been held to be inapplicable by the lower authorities in the present case. 9. Government further notes that the lower authorities have also dealt in detail various circulars of the Reserve Bank of India and provision of Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) 2009-14 issued by the Department of Commerce. From an analysis of these provisions, the lower authorities have concluded that write off of foreign exchange on default of foreign buyer and compensation of the same by way of ECGC does not entitle the exporter t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
