Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 1164 2019 SLD 1164 2019 PTD 1090
Customs Appellate Tribunal
Appeal No. Cus. 136/PB of 2017, decision & hearing Date : 02-07-2018
SYED SARDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)
Danish Ali Qazi for Appellant. Mussa Khan, Superintendent/D.R. for
Respondents.

M/S. LUCKY CEMENT LIMITED, PESHAWAR

VS

THE SUPERINTENDENT CUSTOMS REBATE, PESHAWAR AND ANOTHER

Law: Export Policy Order, 2005

Section: 8(1)(a)

Export Policy Order, 2005--- ----S. 8(1)(a)---SRO No. 450(I)/2001, dated 18-6-2001---SRO No. 931(I)/2007, dated 11-9-2007---SRO No. 613(I)/2007, dated 16.6.2007---Export of cement to Afghanistan---Claim for repayment of customs duty---Rejection of claim being barred by time---Scrutiny of the duty drawback claims revealed that, all the claims were filed after expiry of limitation period of 210 days as provided under SRO No. 450(I)/2001, dated 18-6-2001 and SRO No. 931(I)/2007, dated 11-9-2007---Superintendent of Customs (Rebate), vide his order-in-original had rejected the payment of claims of the appellant for violation of provisions of said SROs---Collector of Customs (Appeals), Collector of Customs (Appeals) upheld the order-in-original---Validity---Cases of export to Afghanistan against claims of rebate were under correspondence with the Federal Board of Revenue and Ministry of Commerce---Ministry of Commerce had devised a way out under which such claims could be considered by the Department pending the receipt of verification from Afghan Customs Department---Officer concerned sanctioning rebate claims, was competent to condone the delay in filing of claims, provided that the exporter had sufficient justification in his favour that the delay was beyond his control---Matter in question being under correspondence and was yet to be resolved the delay occurred in a way, was beyond the control of appellant---Sanctioning authority should have condoned the delay at the time of sanctioning of rebate or according to the procedure devised by the Ministry of Commerce---Contention of Departmental Representative that claims of rebate were not admissible being filed beyond the stipulated period of 210 days, did not hold the reasons---Department had not taken into consideration Ministry of Commerce's instructions issued vide OM No.16(1)/2005-E.I. dated 17-8-2007 as communicated by Federal Board of Revenue---Tribunal observed that claims of rebate filed by the appellant should have been considered in the light of those instructions, and action should have been taken if they had failed to produce the verified documents from the respective quarters---Delay was condoned with…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492