LAWS(MAD)-2010-1-71

PARMAR EXPORTS Vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

Decided On January 11, 2010
PARMAR EXPORTS Appellant
V/S
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (DRAWBACK) Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order under challenge is passed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Drawback), Chennai, wherein the Drawback claims made by the petitioner for seven Shipping Bills were suspended till the clearance for release of drawback amount or any other direction from the investigation agencies.

(2.) According to the petitioner, it is a partnership firm engaged in the export of Stainless Steel articles. The petitioner had filed 7 Shipping Bills for claim of drawback for Rs.9,86,263/- in terms of Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Draw Back Rules, 1995 read with Section 75 of the Customs Act, 1962. The respondent had kept the said drawback claim in abeyance without processing the same on the grounds that the department had received a letter in F.No.INT/DGCEI/CHZU/88/2004 dated 06.10.2005 from the Directorate General of the Central Excise Intelligence (DGCEI), Chennai stating that the petitioner had effected fictitious exports and had fraudulently claimed duty drawback running into crores of rupees. As the subject drawback claims vis-a-vis the shipping bills were not the subject issue of the investigation, the petitioner had requested the respondent to process the said drawback claim and sanction the amount. As no response was received by the petitioner from the respondent, the petitioner had filed writ petitions before this court in W.P.Nos.5346 to 5352 of 2008. This court, by an order dated 25.04.2008 directed the respondent to pass appropriate orders within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

(3.) The respondent has filed counter affidavit stating that the petitioner is an exporter of Stainless Steel articles and had filed 7 Shipping Bills, which were treated as original drawback claims. While processing the duty drawback claim submitted by the petitioner, the department had been alerted by the DGCEI vide Letter No.FNO.INT/CHZU/88/2004 dated 06.10.2005 that the petitioner has been indulging in malpractices to obtain more export incentive and thereby causing revenue loss to the Government exchequer.