Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

‘DUTY DRAWBACK’ CANNOT BE EQUATED WITH ‘REBATE OF DUTY’

Customs - Import - Export - SEZ - By: - Mr. M. GOVINDARAJAN - Dated:- 21-9-2017 - Rule 2(a) of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995 defines the term drawback in relation to any goods manufactured in India and exported, as the rebate of duty or tax, as the case may be, chargeable on any imported materials or excisable materials used or taxable services used as input services in the manufacture of such goods. A drawback may be allowed on the export of goods at such amount, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t, 1962 and the rules made there under, or of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and the rules made there under, or of the Finance Act, 1994 and the rules made there under, the drawback admissible on the said goods shall be reduced taking into account the lesser duty or tax paid or the rebate, refund or credit obtained. The issued to be discussed in this article with reference to the decided case law is whether the drawback is equated with the rebate of duty. In Commissioner of Central Excise, Thane-I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

puty Commissioner, filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The main ground on the appeal is that neither the deficiency memo nor any personal hearing was given to the respondent to defend its case and the rate of drawback applied for was proper and correct. The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeals of the respondent. The respondent, being aggrieved on the order of the Commissioner (Appeals), filed appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal remanded the matter back to the Adjudicat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

stances of the case and in law, CESTAT, Mumbai is correct in making an observation that there is no bar on entertaining appeal against the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) despite thesection 35B(1)(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944? Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CESTAT, Mumbai is correct in remanding the case back to the adjudicating authority, by giving directions to consider the applications under Rule 7 instead of Rule 6 of the said Rules, as filed by t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version