TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 1065X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Re-export of Imported Goods (Drawback of Customs Duties) Rules, 1995 cannot be applied; but it can be pressed into service, where the claim is for interest on drawback under S. 75(A) of the CA, 1962. Where any claim for interest on drawback is returned to the claimant as incomplete in any material particulars or is without the documents specified, unless the requirements specified in deficiency memo are complied within thirty days from the date of receipt of deficiency memo, the same will not be treated as claim filed under sub-rule (1) of Rule 5 of the aforesaid Rules - claim is for drawback only under S. 74 and interest is not claimed. So, R. 5(4)(a) and (b) will not come into application; but the 5th respondent Revisional Authorit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... In June, 2006, the petitioner exported certain parts of the Bipolar Membrane Cell Electrolyser. Subsequently, these were re-exported under the claim for drawback under S. 74 of the Customs Act, 1962. According to the petitioner, the equipments were re-exported after getting free replacement from the supplier which were cleared under Bill of Entry No. 179617/7-6-2006 and the goods were re-exported within 17 months of import and hence within the prescribed time limit of two years under S. 74 of the Customs Act, 1962. Thus, statutory condition for being eligible for drawback under Section 74 had been complied with. But, the 5th respondent, allowed the revision on a finding that the application was defective and the defect was not cured within ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estion to be considered is, whether Rule 5(4)(a) of the Re-export of Imported Goods (Drawback of Customs Duties) Rules, 1995 is applicable to a claim for drawback only, under S. 74 of the Customs Act. Since the question in controversy revolves around R. 5(4)(a), it is apposite and profitable to extract the relevant rule which is given below : Rule 5(4)(a) Any claim which is incomplete in any material particulars or is without the documents specified in sub-rule (2) shall not be accepted for the purpose of Section 75A and such claim, shall be returned to the claimant with the deficiency memo in the form prescribed by the [Principal Commissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be] within fifteen days of submiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the rule specifically mandates that the application shall be deemed not to have been filed for the purpose of S. 75A, if the application is returned to the claimant with the deficiency memo in the form prescribed by the Commissioner of Customs. When the rule specifically says that the rigor of the rule can be applied to a specific purpose, the rule can be applied for that purpose only, and not for any other purpose. 9. Where the claimant has applied for drawback on re-export of duty paid goods only under S. 74 of the Customs Act, 1962, the time bar under R. 5(4)(a) and (b) of the Re-export of Imported Goods (Drawback of Customs Duties) Rules, 1995 cannot be applied; but it can be pressed into service, where the claim is for interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
