9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1450X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ber Palace Road, Jaipur, (hereinafter referred to as the applicant) against Commissioner (Appeals)'s Order-in-Appeal No. 53(SLM)CUS/JPR-I/2015, dated 21-9-2015 rejecting the applicant's appeal against Order-in-Original No. 134/2014-15, dated 2-6-2014 by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex Sanganer, Jaipur. 2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the Revision Application ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ack Rules, 1995, read with Section 75 of the Customs Act, 1962, and the same was confirmed by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs vide his order dated 2-6-2014. A penalty of Rs. 12,000/- was also imposed on applicant under Section 117 of Customs Act, 1962. Their appeal against the said order of the Deputy Commissioner was also rejected by the Commissioner (Appeals) vide above referred order dated 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of the goods has not been realised within six months from the export of the goods. But in this case it is noticed that the applicant has received the sale proceeds in time and the mistake on the part of the applicant is only that they did not submit C.A. certificate in time on six monthly basis as per C.B.E. & C. Circular No. 5/2009-Cus., dated 2-2-2009. In this regard the Commissioner (Appeals) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tted on six monthly basis before 7th January and July in respect of export for which the dues were to be realised in previous six months. 5. From the above observation of Commissioner (Appeals) it is manifest that the applicant has realised the sale proceeds well in time and as a result the applicant's case is not covered under Rule 16/16A of Drawback Rules, 1995. While non-submission of CA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
