Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  The GSTN has issued an Advisory dated 21.04.2026 about the introduction of an Offline Tool for the Invoice Management System (IMS)  *  CBIC extends due dates for filing of FORM GSTR 3B  for the month of April 2026 *  Interest cannot be imposed in adjudication order, if not demanded/quantified in show cause notice : Allahabad HC *  Wheelchairs with toileting facility eligible for exemption: CESTAT affirms customs duty exemption to importer *  Industries urge GST council to allow inverted duty refunds on input services *  Tamil Nadu GST dept introduced virtual hearing facility for GST appeals under under section 107 of the TNGST act: detailed guidelines  *  CIC urges authorities to implement GST evasion complaint tracking system *  Even if the assessee opts "NO" for personal hearing in form DRC-06 ,The mandatory requirement under section 75(4) to grant opportunity of hearing cannot be waived:Gujarat High Court  *  Glufosinate imports curbs imposed by govt *  Government extends Re-import period for exported cut & polished diamonds *  CIC flags lack of tracking system for tax evasion complaints,urges GST authorities to improve transparency *  No Custodial Interrogation needed in GST fraud case based on documentary evidence already in Department's Possession : Chattisgarh HC *  Orders under section cannot be sustained if passed without considering the taxpayer's objections and without granting a personal hearing:Gujarat High Court *  Mere cancellation of supplier's registration cannot,by itself,justify denial of ITC or cancellation of the recipient's registration:Bombay High Court *  High Court sets aside GST notice citing factual errors and natural justice violations *  Provisional Bank Attachment under Section. 110 of Customs Act Unsustainable Beyond Statutory period without Extension order: Bombay HC orders to defreeze accounts *  Post Clearance MRP Alteration by Distributor Does not attract Differential Customs Duty: CESTAT *  DGFT Expands scope of 'Screws' classification under RoDTEP Scheme  *  E-way bills surze to all time high of 140.6 million in March *  GST Exemption Allowed on Pure Labour Services for Standalone Houses: AAR  *  GST Payable Only on Margin in Second-Hand Car Sales, Subject to Strict Conditions and No ITC Claim: AAR *  DGFT rolls out procedure for allocation of calcined coke *  GST portal update : Pre-deposit amount now editable in Appeals *  J&K HC declared TMT scrap a 'Specified Good' eligibile for GST refunds under Support Scheme  *  Pigmy agents are employees of banks; no GST can be levied on commission  paid to them : Karnataka HC *  DGFT Revises HS Code Description for Screws Under RoDTEP *  GST Registration Cancellation Invalid Without Proper Service of Notice: Allahabad High Court. *  Bengaluru CGST | GST Backlog Appeals Deadline Fixed at June 30, 2026 *  No Time Bar on Refund of Service Tax for Services Not Rendered: CESTAT  Remands Indiabulls Case for Unjust Enrichment Check. *  Supreme Court Holds Renewable Energy Incentive Must Benefit Generators, Not Be Adjusted in Tariff
Subject News *   Delhi HC Quashes Order, Says Reminder Cannot Validate Improperly Served GST SCN *  KARNATAKA HIGH COURT REMANDS GST SHORTFALL MATTER DUE TO ABSENCE OF PERSONAL HEARING   *  CESTAT cancels confiscation and penalties on imported computer cabinet cases: Custom duty restricted to 111 surplus units *  Deposit of tax during search or investigation cannot be treated as 'Voluntary Payment' : Bombay High Court *  Section 76 of the CGST cannot be invoked where the tax has already been duly deposited, even if through another registration of the same entity: Madras High Court *  Sec 74 allows use of material regardless of source; illegality or flaws in section 67 search do not vitiate valid adjudication: HC *  Inter-State transfer of ITC on Amalgamation permissible as given under section 18(3) read with rule 41 of the CGST rules, 2017: Gujarat High Court *  HC: No GST on commisson paid to Pigmy Agents *  IGST refund denial on illegible bill of lading invalid absent chance to furnish docs; merit reconsideration in appeals directed: HC *  ITC is not admissible on GST paid on leasehold rights of land used fpr setting up an air seperation plant: AAAR,Tamil Nadu *  GST: No penalty under Section 74 after voluntary ITC reversal due to non-existent supplier : High Court *  TN AAAR denies GST ITC on Land Lease under Sec. 17(5)(d) for setting up plant and machinery *  GST proceedings quashed as notices sent to old address, despite updated address in registration *  Importer Can’t Be Penalised for Alleged IGCR Procedural Lapses Without Evidence of Departmental Error: CESTAT *  Structured Healthcare Training Not ‘Charitable Activity’, 18% GST Payable: AAR  *  CESTAT As The Appellate Authority For Central Sales Tax Disputes: A Paradigm Shift Under Finance Act, 2023 *   Rs. 25K Cost Imposed On SGST Joint Commissioner for Attaching Bank  Accounts Without Forming Mandatory “Opinion”: Bombay HC *   Ex-Parte GST Order Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice: Karnataka  High Court Quashes Adjudication and Bank Attachment.  *   Retrospective GST Cancellation Can’t Invalidate Genuine Transactions:  Jaipur Commissioner (Appeals) Quashes Rs. 95,670 ITC Demand. *   GST Pre-Deposit Non-Compliance: Allahabad High Court Allows Appeal  Subject to Rs. 30 Lakh Balance Deposit, Recognises Offline Filing. *  Documentary Nature of Evidence: Allahabad High Court Grants Bail in Rs. 32.66 Crore Fake ITC Fraud Case *  Supreme Court Flags Systemic Bias in Army’s Permanent Commission Process for Women Officers *  Re-Determination of Land Compensation Can Be Based on Appellate Court Awards, Clarifies Scope of S. 28-A: Supreme Court. *  Supreme Court Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Costs On Rent Authority Officer For Acting Beyond Jurisdiction. *  DGGI Meerut | Court Denies Bail to Accused in Claiming Fake ITC And Export Refunds *  Denial of GST Rate Revision Benefit to Contractor Violates Article 14: Rajasthan HC *  GST Registration Cancellation for Non-Filing of Returns: Gauhati High Court Directs Restoration on Compliance. *   Supreme Court Quashes FEMA Adjudication Orders, Revives Proceedings at  Show Cause Stage. *   Higher Rank, Harsher Punishment Justified: Supreme Court Restores Dismissal  of Bank Manager in Misappropriation Case. *   Limitation for Export Refund to Be Counted from Foreign Exchange Realisation,  Not From Export Invoices Issuance: CESTAT  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2014-15/2368

Can an assessee file declaration for Drawback later on after clearance of the goods for export from the port without any such reasons which are under his control ?

Case:-COMMSIIOSNER OF CUSTOMS, VISAKHAPATNAM  Versus  CARGIL INDIA PVT. LTD.

Citation:-2014 (299) E.L.T. 290 (A.P.)

Brief fact:- This appeal is directed against an order dated 23-12-2009 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Bangalore in appeal No. C/81/2009 [2010 (258) E.L.T. 298 (Tribunal)].
The assessee had filed 14 shipping Bills for export of soyabean meal through Visakhapatnam Port to Vietnam and Japan. The shipping bills were filed between 8-11-2007 and 23-1-2008. 3. While filing the shipping bills, the assessee did not claim any draw-back of duty under the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Draw-back Rules, 1995 (for short 'the Rules'). In other words, the assessee filed free shipping bills for export. 4. Much later, on 6-8-2008 the assessee made an application to the Commissioner of Customs for converting the free shipping bills into drawback shipping bills. During the course of submissions before the Commissioner in this regards reliance was placed by the assessee on Rule 12(1)(a) of the Rules. This Rule reads as under:
"RULE 12. Statement/Declaration to be made on exports other than by Post.– (1) In the case of exports other than by post, the exporters shall at the time of export of the goods:
(a)    state on the shipping bill or bill of export, the description, quantity and such other particulars as are necessary for deciding whether the goods are entitled to drawback, and if so, at what rate or rates and make a declaration on the relevant shipping bill or bill of export that - .
(i)            a claim for drawback under these rules is being made;
 
(ii)           in respect of duties of Customs and Central Excise paid on the containers, packing materials and materials and the service tax paid on the input services used in the manufacture of the export goods on which drawback is being claimed, no separate claim for rebate of duty or service tax under the Central Excise Rules, 2002 or any other law has been or will be made to the Central Excise authorities :
Provided that if the Commissioner of Customs is satisfied that the exporter or his authorized agent has, for reasons beyond his control , failed to comply with the provisions of this clause, he may, after considering the representation, if any, made by such exporter or his authorized agent, and for reasons to be recorded, exempt such exporter or his authorized agent from the provisions of this clause."
 
The Commissioner considered the request of the assessee and came to the conclusion by his order dated 24-10-2008 that the assessee had not been able to give any explanation "for reasons beyond his. Control "for not making a drawback claim at the time of filing the shipping bills. The Commissioner also relied upon Circular No. 4/2004, dated 16-1-2004 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs which stated that the Commissioner may examine and consider individual requests on merits and facts. Applying the provisions of the circular, the Commissioner came to the conclusion that since the goods had been exported and were not subject to any physical examination, the request for converting the free shipping bills into drawback shipping bills could not be acceded to. Under the circumstances, the claim of the assessee was rejected by the Commissioner. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and that appeal was allowed by the order under challenge.

Appellant’s contention:-

Respondent’s contention:-

Reasoning of judgment:- They have heard learned counsel for the parties and are of the opinion that the following substantial question of law arises for consideration :-
“Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in allowing the assessee to convert the free shipping bills into drawback shipping bills notwithstanding the provisions of Rule 12(1)(a) of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995?”
In their opinion, the answer to the aforesaid substantial question of law must be in the negative, in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee.
A plain reading of the Rules, particularly Rule 12(1)(a) makes it very clear that conversion of a free shipping bill can be allowed into a drawback shipping bill only if the assessee is able to satisfy the Commissioner that "for reasons beyond his control", drawback was not claimed. In the instant case, there is nothing on record to suggest that the claim for duty drawback was beyond the control of the assessee. All that has been stated by the assessee is that it was not aware of the correct legal position and, therefore, it did not make the claim for duty drawback in the first instance.
 Apart from the fact that the aforesaid explanation is not satisfactory, Theyfind that the assessee did not make any claim for duty drawback for as many as eight months even after the shipping bills were filed. It is quite clear that the assessee made the claim for duty drawback only as an afterthought. There were no reasons beyond its control for making the claim for duty drawback earlier.
In view of the above, in their opinion, the Tribunal was in error in allowing the appeal filed by the assessee and directing the conversion of the free shipping bills filed by the assessee into drawback shipping bills. It is also submitted by learned Senior Counsel for the assessee that even otherwise, the assessee has a right to have the free shipping bills converted into drawback shipping bills. They cannot agree with this submission for the simple reason that Rule 12(1)(a) of the Rules provides that conversion is permissible only if the assessee is able to give satisfactory reasons to suggest that at the initial stage, duty drawback was not claimed for reasons beyond its control. The assessee has not been able to furnish any such reason and, therefore, Theyare not inclined to accept the submission made in this regard by learned Senior Counsel for the assessee. Under the circumstances, the order passed by the Tribunal is aside and the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed. The miscellaneous application is also disposed of.

Decision:-Appeal allowed.

Comment:- The law is very clear on the terms of claiming the drawback once the export has been done. It clearly states that an assessee can convert the free shipping bill into a drawback shipping bill only if he is able to convince the designated authority that the drawback claim was not filed due to reasons beyond his control.  In this particular case, the assessee was not able to prove the same and thus he was rightly denied the drawback claim.

Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com