TMI Blog2022 (11) TMI 267X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... view of the change of circumstances by way of clarification issued by the DGFT and withdrawal of the show cause notice, there was no scope for adjudicating authority to deviate from the decision taken by the DGFT to classify the goods under DEPB Entry at Sr.No.2/66 therefore, the adjudicating authority has no authority to sit over the policy decision taken by the DGFT. The clarification given by the DGFT will prevail over the allegation made by the Customs Department - the entire adjudication order passed discarding the decision taken by the DGFT cannot be sustained. Appeal allowed. - Customs Appeal No.10099 of 2013 - Final Order No. A/11348/2022 - Dated:- 4-11-2022 - MR. RAMESH NAIR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND MR. RAJU, MEMBER (TECHNI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Rajkot making the same allegation and wrong availment of excess amount of DEPB amounting to Rs.79,78,420/- thereafter, on appellant s persuasion with DGFT- Delhi through The Seafood Exporters Association of India the DGFT vide letter dated 9th January, 2009 clarified that the appellant is entitled for DEPB on export of Surimi as DEPB Entry at Sr. No.2/66 of the then DEPB Rate Schedule. He submits that after this clarification issued by DGFT in favour of the appellant, the DGFT vide letter dated 21.05.2012 withdrawn the show cause notice dated 03.04.2007. He submits that as per the above sequential development and clarification by DGFT, the issue is no longer under dispute accordingly, the demand of DEPB credit is not admissible. 03 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the above matter. Accordingly after receiving details from all concerned, the matter was discussed in detail in 3rd DEPB Committee Meeting held on 29.07.2008. The DEPB Committee noted that consequent upon the action initiated by the Customs Authorities asking for refund of excess benefit of DEPB availed by the firm M/s Hirawati Marine Product Pvt. Ltd. (formerly M/s. Amar Cold Storage) in view of claim under DEPB entry at S. No.2 instead of 1, the firm approached the Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC) of the Department of Commerce. The DEPB Committee also noted that GRC in its meeting held on 2.11.2007 stated that the marine product (exported by Ms. Amar Cold Storage) namely, Surimi would fall under S. No. 2/66 of DEPB Rate Schedule ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rate schedule. It was also pointed out that Meat is classified under Chapter 2 of ITC (HS) Code. Accordingly, it is clarified that Ms. Hirawati Marine Product Pvt. is entitled for DEPB on export of Surimi as per DEPB entry SI.No.2/66 of the then DEPB Rate Schedule . From the above clarification, it is clear that DGFT has taken a decision that the appellant s export product namely Surimi is classifiable under DEPB entry Sr.No.2/66 even for the period prior to 01.04.2002. We find that on the basis of the above clarification, the DGFT withdrawn the show cause notice dated 03.04.2007 issued to the appellant. The letter dated 21.05.2012 issued by the DGFT is scanned below:- In view of the above change of circumstances by w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
