$~113 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of Decision: 8^th April, 2025 + W.P.(C) 4496/2025 RAJBIR SINGH .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Anurag Soan, Advocate.

versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Arnav Kumar, CGSC with Mr.

Priyam Gandhi and Ms. Savi Garg, Advocates for R-UOI.

Mr. Gibran Naushad, Sr. Standing Counsel with Mr. Harsh Singhal and Mr. Suraj Shekhar Singh, Advocates for R-2.

Mr. Avijit Dikshit, Standing Counsel for R-4 & 5.

Mr. Jatin Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel with R-7.

CORAM:

JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

CM APPL. 20779/2025 (for exemption)

2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 4496/2025, CM APPLs. 20778/2025 & 20780/2025

3. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking quashing of the Show Cause Notices dated 14^th January, 2021 and 30^th December, 2021 (hereinafter ‘impugned Signature Not Verified Signed By:NAMITA W.P.(C) 4496/2025 Page 1 of 16 SCNs’) as well as Order-in-Original dated 14^th January, 2025 (hereinafter ‘impugned OIO’).

4. The present case revolves around the Duty Drawback Scheme (hereinafter ‘Scheme’) which is a unique scheme administrated by the Government. This scheme allows refund or recoupment of customs and excise duties that are paid by the exporters on products which are exported. The purpose is to encourage exports and to enable exporters to set off some of the costs accrued in the process of manufacturing the products which are exported. Even after the introduction of Integrated Goods and Service Tax (hereinafter ‘IGST’) regime, this scheme had been continued in respect of IGST and Compensation Cess which may have been paid by the exporters. The said duty drawbacks are claimed under Sections 74 and 75 of the Customs Act, 1962.

5. This scheme, however, has become the subject of misuse by some traders/ exporters who make fraudulent exports merely with a view of availing the benefits under the scheme. Fraudulent exports could be in various forms including (i) filing of fake documents, (ii) over-valuation of goods that have been exported and (iii) the exporters themselves being completely non- existent etc., Several cases have come before the Court where such duty drawbacks have, in fact, been availed of, which is detected by the Customs Department subsequently.

6. The present case is one such case where the exporter M/s. Abhishek EXIM India, is stated to have exported goods and claimed duty drawback in respect thereof. The Petitioner is the proprietor of M/s Abhishek EXIM, India. He was issued the impugned SCNs with regard to the duty drawbacks claimed by him.

Signature Not Verified Signed By:NAMITA W.P.(C) 4496/2025 Page 2 of 16

7. A perusal of the impugned SCNs reveal that the primary allegation against the Petitioner and his company is that he created parallel invoices with different valuations for the same exports. One set of invoices was submitted to the Delhi Chamber of Commerce and the other set, with the overvalued price, was submitted to the Department only with the intention to claim a higher duty drawback. The entire process is alleged to have been executed by the Petitioner in connivance with two staff members including a Chartered Accountant (hereinafter, ‘CA’).

8. Upon the issuance of the impugned SCNs, the Petitioner participated in the proceedings. In his reply, the stand of the Petitioner was that the shipping bills were duly endorsed by the Assessing Officer and there was application of mind at the time of the exports. Other than this limited submission on merits, the reply has only dealt with various technical issues, including issues of jurisdiction. The Court has seen the reply and there is no specific answer by the Petitioner to the allegations regarding parallel invoices.

9. No issue of the limitation was raised by the Petitioner in the reply. T