Government of India
Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue
Central Board of Excise & Customs
******
Instruction
New Delhi. Dated: 13th March, 2014
To
All Chief Commissioners of Customs/ Customs (Prev.)/ Central Excise & Customs
All Commissioners of Customs/ Central Excise & Customs
All Director General of CBEC/ CDR, CESTAT
Madam/ Sir,
Subject: - Drawback shipping bill in which the higher composite All
Industry Rate applicable when Cenvat facility has not been availed is claimed –
Processing at the time of export - regarding.
Under the extant procedure in EDI, where the exporter files a shipping
bill for export under claim for duty drawback and shows the claim for the higher
composite rate that features in Column (A) of the AIR Drawback Schedule, the
requirement of a “Non-Availment of Cenvat Certificate” appears at the time of
export in the list of documents in EDI System. Only when it is recorded that
this certificate is available, the shipping bill moves to Let Export Order (LEO)
stage. When the shipping bill does not move to the LEO stage, the exporter or
his agent has to amend the shipping bill to show claim for the lower rate of AIR
duty drawback in column (B) of the Schedule. Upon such amendment, the shipping
bill moves to the LEO stage without requirement of the certificate. This does
not prevent the exporter from subsequently claiming higher drawback by following
due procedure.
2. While replying to the Hon’ble Public Accounts Committee in a matter related
to the Audit Report No.15/2011-12, Section 2 (Duty Drawback Scheme) it has come
to notice that in certain cases the amendment of the shipping bill was avoided
even though the necessary certificate for claiming the higher AIR was not
available at the time of export. The practice in such cases was to show, in the
EDI System document menu, that the certificate is available, and simultaneously
record contrary remarks in the ‘departmental comments’ that certificate should
be verified subsequently. Intent behind such remarks was that the certificate be
seen at the time of drawback processing. However, instances were noticed where
drawback was processed at the higher rate based on the details recorded in the
EDI system rather than in the departmental comments. Such a practice is not in
harmony with the EDI’s system-based checks and balances and places revenue at
risk. The Board directs that such a practice should be strictly avoided and
field formations should ensure that the prescribed procedure is scrupulously
followed at the time of export.
Yours faithfully,
Dinesh Kumar Gupta
Director
Telefax: 23360581
F.No.609/156/2013-DBK