TMI Blog2000 (7) TMI 81X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the contents of the affidavit and the counter affidavit together with all other relevant material documents available on record in the form of typed set of papers. I have also taken into consideration the various points raised by the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties during the course of their arguments. 4.In the above facts and circumstances of the case, the only point that arises for consideration is, as to whether there are any valid grounds to allow this writ petition or not. 5.The brief facts of the case of the petitioner as seen from the affidavit are as follows: The petitioner is a Partnership Firm carrying on the business of manufacture and marketing of tinned and pouched roasted cashew nuts, mixed nuts and peanuts. The petitioner has a factory at the SIDCO Industrial Estate, which is fully equipped for the manufacture of the aforesaid items. The roasted cashewnuts are manufactured by a sophisticated process, which requires that the products should be processed and packed in hygenic conditions, which ensure the safety, utility and the quality of the products. The petitioner has a large export market. The products manufactured by the petitioner are e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was not eligible for the duty drawback, since according to him the examination reports of the goods do not state whether the identity of the goods exported was established with reference to the import documents. The first respondent further held that even though the identity was established with reference to import documents, the cans and pouch materials had lost the identity as original goods and assumed the role of packing materials at the time of export. According to the first respondent, for the purpose or section 74, the goods imported should not only retain the identity as goods but also retain their character as goods. In this view of the matter, the first respondent held that the goods had lost their identity and consequently were not eligible for the benefit of duty drawback under section 74 of the Customs Act. Aggrieved the petitioner filed an Appeal before the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras and challenged the validity of the order of the first respondent, declining to grant duty drawback to the petitioner. The Collector of Customs (Appeals) by his order in Appeal No. C-48/98-103 of 1989, dated 19th October, 1990 allowed the petitioner's claim for duty drawback. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he order in Appeal of the Collector (Appeals) and restored the order-in-original of the first respondent. According to the petitioners the order of the third respondent is wrong and opposed to law. No appeal, Revision or other remedy are provided under the Customs Act against an order in review of the third respondent. Hence this writ petition. 6.Per contra, in the counter affidavit filed by the respondents inter alia it is contended by them that as the order of the Collector of Customs (Appeals) was prima facie not correct, the Custom House filed a review application before the third respondent who set aside the order of the appellate authority and restored the order of the original authority after following the principles of natural justice. It is their case that the goods exported were identified as roasted salted mixed nuts and not as cans and pouches and as the goods, imported have lost their original character and identity, the claim under section 74 of the Customs Act, for payment of drawback is untenable. Further according to them, the drawback rate fixed under section 75 of the Customs Act covers Customs and Central Excise duties paid on the raw materials, components, co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s), Madras who set aside the order of the original authority with consequential relief to the petitioner. As the order of the Collector of Customs (Appeals) was prima facie not correct, the Customs House filed a review application before the third respondent who set aside the order of the appellate authority and restored the order of the original authority after following the principles of natural justice. It is significant to note that the settlement of drawback on goods imported and re-exported as such are subject to the condition that the goods are identified as such to the satisfaction of the Asstt. Collector and subject to other conditions laid down therein. However, the goods namely, packing material viz., can pouches in question were not imported as such as having been used for packing salted mixed nuts, the description in the shipping bills itself is, 'Roasted salted, mixed nuts' the goods exported were identified as roasted salted mixed have lost their original character and identity, the claim under section 74 of the Custom Act for payment of drawback is untenable. It is also the strong contention of the respondents that only the drawback rate fixed under section 75 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
