By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, JULY 12, 2016: IN the matter of non-sanction of drawback claims, the petitioners are before the Bombay High Court.

The Counsel for the Revenue inter alia submitted that only those drawbacks are not sanctioned where shipping bills are under investigation;that the sanction/disbursement of drawback in a particular shipment takes some time, usually a period of a month after filing of export bills by the shipping line; that there are lot of shipping bills and which have been placed serially or in a queue; that within a period of 30 - 60 days from the date of shipment, the drawback claims in relation to the petitioner would be processed and duly sanctioned.

The petitioner submitted that they had personally visited the office of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs at Nhava Sheva in relation to the processing of drawback claims and were informed that they (Customs) have received an internal letter from the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence and in the light of the same, the drawback or rebate claim of any nature cannot be processed. However, since the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence has reconfirmed that there is no such alert, yet, the drawbacks are withheld and, therefore, specific directions would be necessary.

The Counsel for the Revenue stated that there is no such internal communication or letter but what must have been notified or informed is the pendency of certain investigation and which is restricted to some shipping bills;that there is no blanket order or internal letter or communication as is complained.

The High Court inter alia observed -

++ We do not think that information of any internal letter or communication is available under the Right to Information Act, 2005. The claimants ought to know as to, when the State facilitates export and when valuable foreign exchange has been brought in the country, why his rebate or drawback claims have not been processed, why they are held back and if there are certain investigations initiated, when would they be completed and any information is required about such export. There should be complete transparency and openness in this regard.

++ We do not approve of the tendency of the authorities in not conducting the investigation expeditiously although they have noticed that false and bogus claims are being raised by certain exporters. There is no need to treat all exporters alike if it is only some exporters who are indulging in a wrongful act. Until such investigations against some entities are in progress, there is no need to hold back all drawbacks and by a wholesale direction or some internal communication, the details of which are not available for consumption of exporters.

Directing that the pending investigation should be concluded expeditiously by 30.09.2016 and matter be placed for compliance, the Writ Petition was disposed of.

In passing: Also see 2013-TIOL-905-CESTAT-DEL.

(See 2016-TIOL-1349-HC-MUM-CUS)