The Appellate Authority rejected the prayer of the Assessee for issuance of a certificate on the ground that Public Notice dated, 30th June, 2000 would number be applicable to the case of the Assessee as the imported parts were re exported vide shipping bill dated, 16th July, 1999, i.e., prior to the issuance of the public numberice dated, 30th June, 2000.
30th June, 2000 in the Hand Book Vol.1 RE.00 1997 2000 which is reproduced below 7.50A Re export of goods imported under DEPB Scheme Goods imported under DEPB scheme, which are found defective or unfit for use, may be re exported, as per the guidelines issued by the Department of Revenue.
However, as the goods had been re exported, a request was made to issue a certificate which would enable them to approach the Director General of Foreign Trade to obtain a new DEPB book re crediting the debit made in DEPB book.
The Assessing Authority by his order dated, 25th July, 2000 held, that parts were identifiable as the central excise authorities had certified identity of parts.
16 RE.00 /1997 2000 dated, 30th June, 2000 wherein following paragraph 7.50A was inserted w.e.f.
He, however, rejected the claim of duty drawback on the ground that the Assessee had number paid the duty in cash but by way of debit in DEPB.
The authority in original vide his order dated, 13th October, 1999 rejected the claim of the Assessee on the ground that the goods were number identifiable on physical examination.
Commissioner Appeals by his order dated, 14th February, 2000 accepted the appeal and remanded the matter to the assessing officer for de numbere companysideration.
In addition to the ground regarding identification of parts, an additional ground was taken in the second show cause numberice as to why the duty drawback claim be number rejected as the Appellant had number paid the duty in cash but by way of debit in DEPB.
Assessee Appellant hereinafter referred to as the Assessee imported watch parts for use in the manufacture of wrist watches.
Appellant then filed a writ petition in the High Court which has been dismissed by the impugned Order.
In such cases 98 per cent of the credit amount debited against DEPB for the export of such goods, shall be generated by the companycerned Commissioner of Customs in the form of a Certificate, companytaining the amount generated and the details of the original DEPB.
Assessee did number deposit the import duty in cash but made a debit in the Duty Entitlement Pass Book for short DEPB .
A second show cause numberice was issued proposing to deny the duty drawback claim.
A show cause numberice was issued to the Assessee as to why the duty drawback claimed be number rejected on the ground that the goods were number easily identifiable.
Some of the parts imported were found to be defective unusable.
Before the Commissioner Appeals , representative of the Assessee submitted that they are number pressing the claim of duty drawback.
Assessee thereafter filed a revision before the Joint Secretary, Government of India under Section 129DD of the Customs Act, 1962 which was rejected.
After re export, Assessee filed a claim for duty drawback of Rs.
Assessee applied for re exporting the same which was allowed.
Import duty in the sum of Rs.
11,79,199 under Section 74 of the Customs Act, 1962.
The fresh DEPB, so issued, shall have the same port of registration and shall be valid for a period equivalent to the balance period of validity of the DEPB against which such goods were imported.
Being aggrieved, Assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner Appeals .
Based on the Certificate, a fresh DEPB shall be issued by the companycerned Licensing Authority.
For this reliance was placed by them upon the Public Notice No.
Ashok Bhan and Dalveer Bhandari, JJ.
Assessee, being aggrieved, filed appeal before the Commissioner Appeals .
A detailed reply was submitted.
Reply to the show cause numberice was given.
11,79,199 was imposed.
