JUDGMENT

Heard learned advocates appearing for the parties.

Relevant facts involve in brief according to the petitioner as appears in this writ petition are as hereunder.

Main issues which require adjudication in this writ petition are as follows:

(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case impugned order of the revisional authority is erroneous both in law and in facts and in disregard to the Notification No. 39(RE-01)/1997-2002, New Delhi dated 22nd November, 2001 issued by the DGFT (Government of India, Ministry of Finance) by holding that the petitioner being 100% EOU could not claim duty Drawback on bulk tea in question procured by it from the bulk tea manufacturer and supplier which has admittedly paid the Excise Duty and that it is the supplier which is only entitled to claim duty Drawback and not the petitioner in spite of the fact that the said bulk tea manufacturer has not claimed the Duty Drawback on such deemed export which took place within the period from 01.06.2000 to 31.03.2001?

(ii) Whether revisional authority is justified in passing the impugned order allowing the revisional application of the respondents customs authority