L&T Construction Equipment Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Chennai-IV) (Madras High Court)
The Madras High Court allowed the writ petition challenging the order-in-original dated 27.05.2022 passed under Rule 16A of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995, whereby the petitioner was directed to repay the duty drawback received on exports.
The petitioner challenged the order on the grounds that it violated the principles of natural justice, failed to consider the petitioner’s replies dated 28.08.2017 and 13.04.2022 seeking additional time to submit a detailed response because the exports related to the years 2004–2005, and that the show cause notice dated 16.08.2017 had been issued after an inordinate delay of more than 12 years from the exports.
In support of its case, the petitioner relied upon Government of India Vs. Citedal Fine Pharmaceuticals [1989 (42) ELT 515 (SC)], which held that statutory demands must be made within a reasonable period, and Pratibha Sytex Ltd Vs. Union of India [2013 (287) ELT 290 (Guj.)], wherein the Gujarat High Court held that, in recovery of erroneously paid duty drawback, a period of three years is the maximum reasonable period for raising a demand.
The respondent contended that a personal hearing notice dated 04.04.2022 had been issued directing the petitioner to appear on 18.04.2022, but the petitioner neither appeared nor submitted a reply, and therefore the writ petition was not maintainable.
