Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *  Dept. Can’t Classify Product as Zarda Scented Tobacco After Repeatedly Approving It As Chewing Tobacco: CESTAT *  Mere Uploading Of GST Order On Portal Is Not “Valid” Service: Tripura HC *  CGST Can Proceed Even If SGST Closed Similar Case Earlier: Delhi HC *  SC upholds 28% GST on online gaming with retrospective effect. *  West Bengal Govt cuts E-way Bill Threshold limit to Rs. 50,000 for intra-state goods movement. *  Criminal Prosecution Under Central Excise Act Can’t Continue After CESTAT Sets Aside Duty Demand on Merits: Punjab & Haryana High Court. *  Madras High Court Quashes GST Assessment Orders for Denial of Personal Hearing; Remands Matter Subject to 10% Deposit *  Ex Parte GST Order: Madras High Court Directs Immediate Removal of Bank/ITC Attachment Upon 25% Deposit *  J.K. Cement Receives GST Demand Order of Rs 8,02,113/- from Ahmedabad Tax Authority *  Delhi Police EOW Busts Alleged Rs. 128 Crore GST Fake Invoice Network. *  REPLY TO SCN CAN’T BE TREATED AS “EMPTY FORMALITY”: ORISSA HIGH COURT QUASHES GST DEMAND OF RS. 57.30 LAKH *  Challenge to CGST Provisions restricting ITC to Bonafide Purchasers : Allahabad HC issues notice *  CBIC Notifies Revised Customs Tariff Values for Edible Oils, Gold, Silver, Brass Scrap and Areca Nuts *  Delhi HC Orders Removal of GST Attachment After Statutory 1 Year Period Expired *  GSTAT Extends Relaxed Appeal Filing Guidelines till December 31, 2026 *  AO fails to Provide Import - Export Data from DGFT to Taxpayer for Reconciliation *  Gold, Silver Imports To Get Costlier As Govt Raises Customs Duty To 10%  *  GSTAT Enables Pre-Payment Access to Document Upload and Checklist for GST Appeal Filing *  GST Portal Restrictions Can’t Override Statute: Gujarat HC Allows Cross-State Transfer Of CGST ITC After Amalgamation *  Centre Revises HS Codes for Large Diameter Steel Pipes Used in Oil & Gas Pipelines *  Customs Duty Liability Arises On Warehouse Clearance Date: Supreme Court *  Government lifts export ban on de-oiled rice bran *  CESTAT Grants 12% Interest on Pre-Deposit for Investigation from Date of Deposit till Refund and Denies Interest on Interest. *  Government Overhauls GST Classification Framework for Non-Alcoholic Beverages; Fruit Juice Drinks, Milk-Based Beverages and Caffeinated Drinks to Attract Revised 5% and 40% GST Rates from May 1, 2026 *  India’s gross GST collections hit a record Rs 2.42 lakh crore in April, up 8.7% *  Customs clearance stalled, revenue hit over MRP dispute *  Shipping Corporation explores Middle East routes as Hormuz tensions disrupt cargo movement *  India, Kenya signs MoU for exchange of pre-arrival customs information *  No demand of Taxes under Reverse Charge if Tax Already Discharged by Service Provider under forward charge *  The India-New Zealand Free Trade Agreement, signed "once-in-a-generation" deal that eliminates tariffs on 100% of Indian exports to New Zealand
Subject News *  Consignment Sales Can’t Be Reclassified as Inter-State Sales Based on Pre-Agreement Evidence: CESTAT *  Exporter Can’t Be Denied Advance Authorization Benefit Due To ICEGATE Technical Glitch: Delhi High Court *  No GST Demand For Mere Wrong Set-Off Of IGST Credit Under CGST And SGST Heads: Kerala HC. *  Cenvat Credit Can’t Be Denied on Input Services Having Nexus With Manufacturing Activities: CESTAT *  Pending Proceedings Can’t Survive Without Saving Clause: Calcutta High Court Quashes GST Demand of Rs. 6.28 Crore After Omission of Rule 96(10) *  Madras HC Quashes GST Demands on TASMAC (Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation) Bar Licence Fee *  GST Proceedings Cannot Survive Omitted Rule Without Saving Clause: Calcutta HC *  Provisional Release Can’t Be Denied Solely On Dept. Suspicion Of Misclassification And Undervaluation Of Imported Goods: CESTAT *  Businesses Should Not Be Kept Outside GST Regime Without Due Process: Gauhati High Court *  Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Reconsideration of Contractors’ Claim for Additional GST Payment After Tax Rate Hike From 12% to 18% *  S. 108 Statements Can’t Be Sole Basis Without Following Section 138B Procedure: CESTAT *  Bombay High Court Frames Key Questions on Mandatory Distribution of ITC U/s 20 CGST Act *  Filing of Annexure-B for Refund Applications involving Accumulated ITC using the offline utility in GST portal: GSTN *  No Service Tax on Parent Company’s Un-Invoiced Cost Allocations Without Actual Service or Consideration: CESTAT  *  Calcutta High Court Upholds GST Classification of Polypropylene Leno Bags as Plastic Products *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  GSTAT Issues Major Bench Allocation Framework; All Appeals to First Go Before Division Bench *  ITC Blocking Without Reasoned Order Violates Rule 86A; Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Release of Credit *  Allahabad HC Refuses Bail to CGST Superintendent In Rs. 70 Lakh Bribery Case *  S.130 Can’t Be Invoked Without Prior Tax Determination U/s 73/74: Allahabad High Court Quashes GST Confiscation Proceedings *  SC grants Bail to Rs 54cr GST case  *  Karnataka HC Sets Aside Duplicate GST Orders, Orders Fresh Hearing on GSTIN Cancellation *  DRC-01 Summary Can’t Replace Mandatory SCN: Gauhati High Court *  Transfer Of Unutilized ITC After Amalgamation - Supreme Court Issues Notice *  PUNJAB & HARYANA HC QUASHES GST CANCELLATION NOTICE FOR FAILURE TO PROVIDE CBIC ENQUIRY REPORT *  LICENSE FEE, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CHARGES NOT INCLUDIBLE IN CUSTOMS VALUE UNLESS THEY ARE A CONDITION OF SALE: CESTAT *  DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF GST ATTACHMENT AFTER STATUTORY 1 YEAR PERIOD EXPIRED *  CUSTOMS BROKER CAN’T BE FAULTED JUST BECAUSE EXPORTER’S GST REGISTRATION WAS PREVIOUSLY CANCELLED: CESTAT   *  Supreme Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Delhi HC Ruling Holding Real Operator Behind Fake GST Firms Liable As ‘Taxable Person  *  GST Appeal Can’t Be Rejected Merely Because DRC-07 Was Not Uploaded On Portal: Bombay High Court  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ-Case law-2013/14-1585

Whether conversion of shipping bill under drawback scheme to advance licence scheme possible?

Case: - CHERMA'S EXQUISITE LTD. VS COMMR. OF CUS. (EXPORTS), CHENNAI
 
Citation: - 2013 (288) E.L.T. 545 (Tn. - Chennai)
 
Brief facts:- The facts of the case are that the appellants filed a shipping bill  on 2-7-2009 for export of ready garments under advance licence cum duty drawback scheme. Thereafter, they moved an application for conversion of the part of the consignment under drawback scheme to advance licence scheme on 15-9-2009. As the appellants were given the benefit of drawback scheme before their filing of the request on 15-9-2009 and considering the fact that the appellants are not entitled for benefit of conversion as per board’s circular No. 4/2004-Cus., dated 16-1-2004, their request for conversion from duty drawback scheme to advance licence scheme was denied. Against the said order, the appellant is in appeal before the tribunal.
 
Appellant contention :-  On the behalf of the appellants, Shri A.K. Jayaraj, Advocate appears and submits that although the duty drawback scheme has been sanctioned but the appellants are ready to pay back the duty drawback claimed along with interest till the date when the conversion is allowed. He further submits that they are entitled for conversion of shipping bill from drawback scheme to advance licence scheme as per Board’s Circular No. 4/2004-Cus., dated 16-1-2004 as their claim for conversion to advance licence scheme was not denied by the DGFT, Department of commerce or the Customs due to any dispute. Further he submitted that as part of the consignment was under advance licence scheme and a part of the consignment was under duty drawback scheme and the consignment was examined at the time of export of the goods, and all the documents available at the time of clearance of goods as required by section 149 of the customs act, 1962, therefore, their claim for conversion from duty drawback scheme to advance licence scheme be granted.
 
Respondent contention:-The learned SDR  strongly opposed the contention of leaned counsel and submitted that as the appellants have already got duty drawback sanctioned by the adjudicating authority, therefore, they cannot take cannot take double benefit at this stage. Further, he submitted that the adjudicating authority has considered their claim from all the angles and thereafter has come to the decision that their request for conversion from duty drawback scheme to advance licence scheme cannot be accepted on the premise that for export under advance licence scheme requires rigorous examination of goods as compared to the duty drawback scheme and the quantities mentioned in the advance licence has already been exported by the appellants. Therefore, they cannot export more quantity against the licence.
 
Reasoning of judgement: -Considering the submissions made by both sides, in this case, the appellant filed a shipping Bill no. 3419019 on 2-7-2009 for export readymade garments. Part of the consignment was under advance licence scheme and part of consignment was under drawback scheme. The request for conversion was made on 15-9-2009 within 2.5 month for conversion of drawback scheme to advance licence No. 0910037756. The denial was made on the following grounds:-
(a)   the drawback has already been sanctioned.
(b)  They are not covered by Board’s circular No. 4/2004-Cus., dated 16-1-2004 and
(c)   Goods require rigorous examination at the time of export under advance licence scheme.
 
With regard to first ground for denial, the appellants are ready to pay drawback availed by them along with interest. Therefore, the claim cannot be denied on the ground. The denial on the second ground that the Board’ Circular No. 4/2004-Cus., dated 16-1-2004 is not sustainable as the conversion under advance licence scheme has not been denied by the DGFT or ministry of commerce or customs due to any dispute therefore, conversion from drawback scheme to advance licence scheme is available to the appellant. Further, part of the consignment was under advance licence scheme and part of the consignment was under the drawback scheme and at the time export, the consignment was examined by the customs authorities as per advance licence scheme. Therefore, conversion can be allowed and cannot be denied on this premise only. The contention of learned SDR that the appellants have already fulfilled the export obligation against licence No. 010037756, therefore, they are not entitled to take benefit of the said licence is not sustainable as the revenue is getting the amount paid to the appellants under drawback scheme along with the interest and it is immaterial whether they will get benefit under the advance licence scheme or not. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside and appeal is allowed to with consequential relief. Appellant shall approach within 15 days of communication of this order before the authorities concerned with a proof of payment of duty drawback along with interest for conversion of their shipping bill from drawback scheme to advance licence scheme and thereafter within 15 days, the adjudicating authority shall allow conversion of shipping bill from duty drawback scheme to advance licence scheme as per section 149 of the customs Act, 1962.  
 
Decision: -Appeal Allowed.
 
Comment:-The Analogy drawn from this case is that if export is made through shipping bill under duty drawback scheme then that shipping bill can be converted from drawback scheme to advance licence scheme on payment of drawback claimed earlier along with interest as per the section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962.
 
 

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