Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

Deemed Export Entitles Refund of Duty Drawback with Interest: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India upheld the decision of the Karnataka High Court, affirming that M/S. B. T. Patil and Sons Belgaum (Construction) Pvt. Ltd. Is entitled to receive interest on the delayed refund of duty drawback under the ‘deemed export’ scheme. The apex court’s bench, comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, dismissed the appeal filed by the Union of India against the High Court’s judgment.

The case, titled Union of India & Ors. Vs. M/S. B. T. Patil and Sons Belgaum (Construction) Pvt. Ltd. (Civil Appeal No. 7238 of 2009), was pronounced on 5th February 2024. The judgment critically examined the provisions of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, Customs Act, 1962, Central Excise Act, 1944, and the Exim Policy of 1992-1997 and 1997-2002.

M/S. B. T. Patil and Sons, a class-I contractor specializing in civil contract works, was involved in the Koyna Hydro Electric Power Project, Maharashtra, financed by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. The company claimed duty drawback under the ‘deemed export’ scheme of the Exim Policy, which was initially rejected by the Director General of Foreign Trade (DGFT). However, after various representations and a decision by the Policy Interpretation Committee, the DGFT approved the duty drawback in 2002, which was paid in 2003.

The primary contention arose regarding the entitlement of interest on the delayed payment of duty drawback. The respondent approached the High Court seeking interest due to the delay in the refund, which was granted by the High Court. The Union of India appealed against this decision.

Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, in the judgment, noted, “It is evident that supply of goods to the project in question by the respondent was a case of ‘deemed export’ and thus entitled to the benefit under the Duty Drawback Scheme.” The Court further observed that “respondent is entitled to refund of duty drawback as a deemed export under the Duty Drawback Scheme.” Upholding the High Court’s decision, the Supreme Court observed that the respondent was entitled to interest at the rate fixed under Section 27A of the Customs Act, 1962, which at the relevant time was fifteen percent per annum.

The Supreme Court’s judgment reinforces the principle of fairness in the administration of fiscal statutes and emphasizes the entitlement of interest on delayed refunds, marking a significant precedent in cases involving ‘deemed export’ under the Exim Policy.

Date of Decision: 05 February 2024

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. VS M/S. B. T. PATIL AND SONS BELGAUM

 

Similar News