Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2019 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 245 - AT - CustomsRefund - unjust enrichment - Valuation of imported goods - non-coking coal and Bituminous coal - High Seas Sale - rejection of transaction value - Asst. Commissioner held that importer could not prove the excess duty paid and thus could not satisfy the conditions of Section 18 (5) of Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- The respondents have discharged duty on the transaction value arrived on the basis of final quantity of coal in terms of the contract. It is not the case of the department that the respondents have paid any amount over and above such transaction value. Therefore, in terms of Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962, the transaction value requires to be accepted as done by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals). Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has categorically held that there is a lapse of two to seven months in posting the general voucher vis-a-vis the payments made as duty is only an assumption and the balance sheet as on 31.3.2016 very clearly shows these amounts as receivables under current assets from the department and that this was an ample proof that the application for refund is not hit by unjust enrichment. There is no reason as to why we should interfere with the order of the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) - the orders passed by Commissioner (Appeals) are legally tenable and sustainable - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.
|