- (1.) The petitioners carry on business of import and export and have duly been issued an Export Import code by the concerned authorities.
(2.) According to the petitioners, in usual course of business the petitioners imported 3695 pieces of spectacle frames covered by Bills of Entry Nos. 469758 dated 24th October, 2007; 472786 dated 15th November, 2007; 495089 dated 8th April, 2008; 506307 dated 16th June, 2008; 513500 dated 28th July, 2008 and 528249 dated 31st October, 2008. The said Bills of Entry were assessed to duty by the Customs authorities and the petitioners duly paid the duty as assessed. In the petition it is stated that the petitioners paid the duty assessed in respect of the Bills of Entry Nos. 469758 dated 24th October, 2007 and 472786 dated 15th November, 2007 by demand drafts. The duty in respect of the rest of the Bills of Entry was paid by way of the debit of the 'Duty Exemption Pass Book'. According to the petitioners, upon payment of the duty, the proper officer of Customs permitted clearance. After taking clearance of the imported goods, the petitioners allegedly found the goods defective and unfit for sale. After negotiations with the overseas supplier and on instructions of the overseas supplier, the petitioners re-exported 1182 pieces of spectacle frames under Shipping Bill No. AEF 6900987 dated 20th May, 2009 after complying with the requisite customs formalities.
(3.) On or about 17th August, 2009, the petitioners made an application seeking refund of duty. Several reminders were also sent. No action was taken for almost two years.;