9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1458X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 01.07.2012 till the date of payment of drawback. 2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant with a prayer that interest should be paid to the appellant from 14.04.2003 at the rate of 18% per annum. 3. It transpires from the records that the appellant had filed seven shipping bills, all dated 24.02.2003, on 24.02.2003 for export of goods declared as "Ladies Top" and "Denim Shirt" valued at Rs. 4,14,63,360/-. The appellant claimed duty drawback of Rs. 49,75,536/- under section 75 of the Customs Act. The "let export order" was given on 13.03.2003 and the goods were allowed to be exported. 4. A show cause notice dated 11.09.2003 was issued to the appellant proposing to re-determine the value of export goods and consequently, re-determine the eligible drawback due to the appellant. 5. The adjudicating authority dropped the show cause notice by order dated 31.01.2005. 6. Feeling aggrieved, the department filed an appeal before the Tribunal, which appeal was allowed by the Tribunal by order dated 14.09.2006. 7. The appellant challenged the order of the Tribunal by filing an appeal, being Civil Appeal No. 810 of 2007, before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, by judgment date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arly indicates that the drawback benefit arose put of Order-in-Original dated 31.05.2012 and Hon'ble Tribunal only upheld the same. 5.5.1 The value declared by the Appellant was accepted initially in the Order in Original dated 31.01.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Central Excise Delhi III. However, this order while setting aside by Hon'ble CESTAT vide Final order dated 14.09.2006. The matter was remanded to original Authority by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 01.04.2011 and set aside Hon'ble Tribunals order dated 14.09.2006. The net effect of this rounds of litigations was that exports, Let Export Order and the valuation remained provisional. Thus it still cannot be held that a complete claim stood filed for duty drawback as the valuation remained provisional. 5.5.2 In the second round, the Commissioner, vide order dated 31.05.2012 upheld the valuation done by the Appellant and dropped proceedings against them. This order of the Commissioner has been upheld by the Hon'ble Tribunal vide final order dated 07.10.2021. Thus, the valuation of the export goods stood finalized effectively from the date of order of the Commissioner i.e. 31.05.2012 which was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n protracted litigation, the rightful dues of the appellant cannot be denied; (iv) As the proceedings initiated by the show cause notice dated 11.09.2003 were dropped, it would mean that the appellant was eligible to claim drawback when the let order was issued on 13.03.2003; (v) The findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) that the goods were allowed to be exported provisionally and, therefore, the duty drawback claim cannot be considered to be a complete claim on the date of grant of "let export order" is factually incorrect. The goods were not provisionally assessed under section 18 of the Customs Act, but were provisionally released in terms of section 110A of the Customs Act; and (vi) The interest rate provided under notification dated 13.05.2002 when the shipping bills were filed provided interest at the rate of 8%. However, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the appellant would be entitled to claim interest at the rate of 18% per annum. 16. Shri M. R. Dhaniya, learned authorized representative appearing on behalf of the department, however, supported the impugned order and submitted that it does not call for any interference in the app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion to the amount of drawback, interest at the rate fixed under section 27A from the date after the expiry of the said period of one month till the date of payment of such drawback:" 22. As noticed above, drawback on imported materials used in the manufacture of goods which are imported is claimed under section 75 of the Customs Act. Section 75A of the Customs Act provides that where any drawback under section 75 is not paid within a period of one month from the date of filing a claim for payment of such drawback, interest has to be paid at rate fixed under section 27A of the Customs Act from the date after the expiry of period of one month till the date of payment of such drawback. 23. In the present case, the appellant had filed seven shipping bills on 24.02.2003 and the "let export order" was given on 13.03.2003. Under rule 13 of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995 the Drawback Rules that have been framed under section 75(2) of the Customs Act, the submission of the shipping bills is deemed to be a claim for drawback filed on the date on which the proper officer of customs makes an order permitting clearance and loading of goods. Under sub-r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order, clearly provides that the shipping bills shall be treated as a claim for drawback filed on a date on which the proper officer of customs makes an order permitting clearance. The "let export order" was issued on 13.03.2003. Section 75A of the Customs Act provides that if the drawback is not paid within a period of one month from the date of filing the claim, interest shall be paid, in addition to the amount of drawback, at the rate fixed under section 27A of the Customs Act from the date after the expiry of period of one month of the "let export order" till the date of payment of such drawback. In terms of section 75A of the Customs Act, the appellant is entitled to get interest from a date after the expiry of one month from 13.03.2003 upto the date of payment of the drawback amount. The appellant had, accordingly, claimed interest from 14.04.2003 but the Commissioner (Appeals) allowed interest only from 01.07.2012, which date is after the expiry of a period of one month from 31.05.2012. 26. The Commissioner (Appeals) has relied upon the decision of a learned member of this Tribunal in Web Knit Exports to hold that the relevant d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
