Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2017 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (4) TMI 634 - AT - CustomsRefund claim - excess duty paid at 5% instead of 1% - denial on the ground that in terms of Section 149 of the CA, 1962, the amendment in the Bill of Entry is not permissible as the documents on which the refund claim has been filed was not available with the appellant at the time of clearance of the goods - Held that: - there is no issue of interpretation of notification and the matter is based on fact finding. If the appellant has produced the certificate of country of origin then there is no dispute between the parties. The appellant is required to pay Basic Customs duty at the rate of 1% Adv. and excess duty paid by the appellant is to be refunded. Whether the refund claim filed by the appellant can be rejected on the ground that, at the time of clearance of the goods, certificate as prescribed in format was not produced by the appellant? - Held that: - The invoices shows the country of origin as North Korea and the certificate produced at the time of clearance was not in prescribed format but as per the agreement, for claiming preferential tariff treatment, certificate of origin can be produced later-on but with the words ISSUED RETROSPECTIVELY in remarks column. The appellant has produced the said certificate and the same has not been disputed. The appellant has produced the certificate of origin in the prescribed format later on, is not disputed. It is also not disputed that in the bill of entry, the country of original is North Korea. In view of the fact that the goods are of Korean origin, the appellant is liable to pay Basic Customs duty at the rate of 1% and have paid the excess duty. Therefore, the appellant is entitled for refund of claim of excess duty paid by them. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|