Absence of date from which period of 90 days is Reckoned: CESTAT quashes Recovery of Drawback Proceedings [Read Order]

Absence of date - reckoned - CESTAT - Recovery of Drawback proceedings - Taxscan

In a recent ruling the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) quashed recovery of drawback proceedings on the ground that there was absence of date from which period of 90 days is reckoned.

The appellants, M/s Anish India Export, are the exporters and exported goods under claim of rebate. Proceedings were initiated against the appellant for recovery of drawback for failure to produce evidence of receipt of export proceeds in foreign exchange.

Vijaykumari, Shipping Manager of the appellant submitted that they had never received a copy of show cause notice nor a copy of Order-in-Original. Only when their subsequently consignment were stopped from export under an alert issued, they came to know about the said proceedings. Subsequently, they obtained from records, a copy of the Order-in Original and filed an appeal.

The Authorized Representative submitted that Order-in-Original is dated 27.03.2018 and the appeal was filed on 21.06.2019. Since the appeal was filed beyond 90 days prescribed under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962 and that the Commissioner (Appeals) has rightfully rejected it as time barred.

The Tribunal of Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) noted that Section 153 of the Customs Act, 1962, provides for services of order or decisions and that the order etc. should be served by sending it by registered post or by such courier as may be approved by the Commissioner and if it is not possible to serve the order etc. in the said manner, then by affixing it on notice board of the Custom House.

Quashing the service tax demand, the Bench further observed that “However, on which date the concerned Order-in-Original was sent by registered post to the appellant or on which date the said Order-in-Original was affixed on the notice board of the Custom House, has not been stated in the impugned order. I, therefore, do not find the impugned order to be reasonable because the date from which period of 90 days is reckoned with is missing.”

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates

taxscan-loader