STOVEC INDUSTRIES LTD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.

(2.) Claim of the petitioner for drawback benefits has been denied by the Authority on the ground that the petitioner has submitted the application after expiry of 90 days. The case of the petitioner is that he has imported raw material for manufacturing two machines. Material for both the machines were common. When he exported the first machine, the entire papers of import of raw material were submitted before the Authorities for claiming drawback. Now, when the petitioner exported the second machine and again claimed drawback, those papers were necessary. Those papers were lying with the department and they were returned to the petitioner only on 13-10-2004. Immediately, thereafter, on 26-11-2004, the petitioner submitted an application under Rule 6 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995.

(3.) Considering the fact that necessary papers on the basis of which the petitioner was claiming drawback were lying with the Department and they were returned only on 13-10-2004, delay in filing the application should have been condoned under the provisions of Rule 17 of the Drawback Rules of 1995.