Exporters Benefit Under Notification Can Be Claimed Later Even If Not Initially Availed: CESTAT on Reimported Goods [Read Order]
The CESTAT noted that for the purpose of CENVAT, discrimination cannot be made between the entire ship and the bunker lying in the engine room.
![Exporters Benefit Under Notification Can Be Claimed Later Even If Not Initially Availed: CESTAT on Reimported Goods [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/cestat-banglore-Exporters-Benefits-Reimported-Goods-taxscan.jpg "Exporters Benefit Under Notification Can Be Claimed Later Even If Not Initially Availed: CESTAT on Reimported Goods [Read Order]")
The Bangalore Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) ruled that exporters can claim benefits under a suitable notification such as duty exemptions even at a later stage if not initially availed. SSK Export Ltd., the appellant exported 20592 kg of South India BP1 Tea to the Netherlands under the Post-DEPB Scheme in 2004. The foreign buyer rejected...
The Bangalore Bench of the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) ruled that exporters can claim benefits under a suitable notification such as duty exemptions even at a later stage if not initially availed.
SSK Export Ltd., the appellant exported 20592 kg of South India BP1 Tea to the Netherlands under the Post-DEPB Scheme in 2004. The foreign buyer rejected the consignment due to discrepancies in blending.
Raise Funds Smarter – Your Guide to SME IPO Success- Click here to enroll
The cargo was reimported into India in 2005 under Notification No.158/95 for re-export after correction and reprocessing. The goods were re-exported in April 2005 after Customs clearance. Customs authorities issued a show-cause notice alleging non compliance with Notification No.158/95 and demanded duties and interest.
On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the decision of the adjudicating authority. Aggrieved, the assessee appealed before the CESTAT arguing that the returned goods were identified and re-exported after Customs inspection and Notification No.158/95 was satisfied.
Raise Funds Smarter – Your Guide to SME IPO Success- Click here to enroll
The appellant’s counsel argued that the exemption under Notification No.94/96 should apply as no Duty Entitlement Passbook (DEPB) scheme benefits were claimed. The appellant’s counsel submitted the bond executed at reimport proving the identity of the goods.
The two-member bench comprising D.M Misra (Judicial Member) and R Bhagya Devi (Technical Member) observed it’s undisputed that the Customs authorities had inspected the returned goods and confirmed their identity before clearing them for re-export.
Raise Funds Smarter – Your Guide to SME IPO Success- Click here to enroll
The tribunal explained that no DEPB benefits were claimed during the initial export, as evidenced by the shipping bill, and the appellant was eligible for this exemption. The tribunal referenced the Supreme Court’s ruling in Share Medical Care vs. Union of India (2007) which established that an appellant can claim benefits under a notification even at a later stage. The tribunal relied on IE Impex Pvt. Ltd. vs. CC (Port), Kolkata which allowed exemption under Notification No. 94/96 when conditions under Notification No. 158/95 were not strictly met. Considering the facts, the tribunal held that the demand for duties and interest was unjustified. The appellant’s appeal was allowed.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
