Sangeeta Goyal Vs Commissioner of Customs (Exports) (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court held that initiation of customs recovery proceedings against a dead person is unsustainable and liable to be quashed. Accordingly, recovery proceedings quashed.
Facts- Petitioner’s husband, late Arun Kumar Goyal effected certain exports during 2009-2014 through ICD Tughlakabad and availed benefit of Duty Drawback Scheme in terms of Section 75 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with the Customs, Central Excise Duties & Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995. Petitioner’s husband expired on 17.08.2018. Consequent to his demise, the activities of the firm abruptly stopped.
Respondent sent a letter dated 09.02.2017 in the name of Arun Kumar Goyal, requesting to submit copies of pending 48 BRCs in which total drawback of Rs. 22,62,352/- was involved but the letter was returned undelivered by postal authority. On verification of exporter’s BRC details at the website, it was found that no e-BRC in respect of the exporter was available there.
In view of the above, a Demand cum Show Cause Notice dated 28.09.2018 was issued to the exporter, asking him to explain and to show cause as to why the availed drawback amounting to Rs. 22,62,352/- against the shipping bills could not be recovered from him along with applicable interest and why penalty should not be imposed upon him under the Act. SCN was returned ‘undelivered’. No reply was filed. OIO dated 31.05.2019 was passed confirming the demand of duty drawback amounting to Rs. 22,62,352/- and orders were passed for its recovery along with penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- upon M/s. L.V. Tools & Components. Thereafter, a recovery notice dated 12.09.2019 was issued in the name of late husband of the petitioner, which has been challenged before us.
