Tax Updates - TMI e-Newsletter
Forget password
New User/ Regiser
2021 (12) TMI 362 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - Customs
Head Note / Extract:
Validity of assessment of bills of entry - Levy of ADD - Rubber Chemical Antioxidant (Kumanox 13) - N/N. 04/2016-CUS - adjudicating authority rejected the claim on the ground that the appellant have not challenged the assessment of bill of entry - HELD THAT:- The issue that whether the assessment of bill of entry needs to be challenged in order to claim the refund of differential ADD arising due to the reduction of rate of ADD by Notification. There is no need to challenge the assessment as the Section 9A sub section (2) clause (b) itself has provision for refund in case of ADD. Therefore, the refund is arising as per the provision, therefore, there is no further requirement of challenging the assessment of bill of entry. As regard the ground of rejection made by learned Commissioner (Appeals) of time bar, the refund was filed by the appellant on 27.10.2016 and Notification reducing the rate of ADD was issued on 29.01.2016. Firstly, there is no time limit provided in the section 9A sub section (2) clause (b) for claiming refund, therefore, the appellant have filed the refund claim within reasonable time i.e. one year. The appellant are entitled for the refund. Since the lower authority have not examined the factual aspect of the refund, the refund needs to be processed by verifying the documents - Appeal allowed by way of remand.