KALING VANIDHYA Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the impugned notice styled as a demand notice, the petitioner was informed that they exported ladies woolen, woven vest and children skirts valued at Rs. 22,16,833/- on FOB claiming drawback amount of Rs. 5,14,694/- under S. No. 61. 01 at 10% and 14. 5% on FOB value. It was further stated that the drawback was eligible for the above said exported items under Sub. S. No. NIL at NIL% whereas the said amount of Rs. 5,14,694/- paid erroneously was recoverable under Rule 16 of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1995 read with Section 75 2 (ab) of the Customs Act, 1962. Thus, the petitioner was directed to pay the said amount within fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of the demand notice with interest. The notice further proceeds to say that if the petitioner is inclined to give any explanation to the same, that may be given orally or in writing on or before 26. 9. 2003 and thereafter, orders will be passed in accordance with law.

(2.) IT is the case of the petitioner that immediately, the petitioner informed the respondents that the impugned demand-cum-show cause notice is barred by limitation and in view of the bar of limitation, the second respondent has no jurisdiction to issue the notice dated 16. 9. 2003. In spite of that, the second respondent called upon the petitioner to appear for an enquiry. This is the only objection raised in this case.

(3.) I have heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials on record.