JAMBA EXPORTS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prays for quashing of final order dated 22-9-2006 (Annexure P-3) passed by Customs and Central Excise Settlement Commission , New Delhi- respondent No. 2 , rejecting the application of the petitioner under Section 127B(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 , in which prayer was made for settlement in respect of show cause notice dated 6-10-2005 issued by the Commissioner of Customs , the Mall , Amritsar-respondent No. 1.

(2.) Brief facts of the case , necessary for disposal of the petition , are that the petitioner is a proprietorship concern with its Head Office at Jalandhar and is engaged in the trading of hand tools falling under Chapter Heading 73 of the Schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act 1985. According to the assertion made by the petitioner , it exported hand tools in the month of March, 2000 under shipping bi No. 2277 , claiming benefit of Duty Entitlement Pass Book Scheme (DEPB). It may be pointed out that DEPB is an incentive scheme which entitles an exporter to claim credit on the basis of this scheme at a pre-determined rate. The revenue w.e.f. 1-4-2000 imposed value cap of Rs. 70 per kg. in respect of hand tools exported under DEPB scheme as the goods exported by the petitioner were actually exported on 5-4-2000 but date of export on shipping bill was mentioned as 31-3-2000. The dispute had arisen as to whether the petitioner is to be assessed on the basis of cap of Rs. 70 per kg. , imposed w.e.f. 1-4-2000 or it is entitled to the whole benefit of DEPB scheme as it was existing up to 31-3-2000. The petitioner had in fact availed the benefit on the basis of deduction made in the bill of shipping on the assumption that he had exported th goods on 31-3-2000 and had availed the benefit of Rs. 4, 62 889/-.

(3.) On 6-10-2005 , Respondent No. 1 i.e. Commissioner of Customs issued a show cause notice (Annexure P-l) calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why the goods exported by it should not be confiscated and as the goods have already been exported , redemption fine should not be imposed and why penalty under Section 114 of the Act should not be imposed.