Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2021 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (10) TMI 85 - AT - CustomsRefund of Customs Duty - duty paid under protest - rejection on the ground that the transfer bonds in which the goods were transferred from Vizag Customs to EOU Bheemli have been closed which was duly intimated to the appellant but was not contested at the appropriate stage - shortage in the quantity of chemical imported - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- The goods imported, since were highly volatile in nature were mentioned to be susceptible to evaporation during the course of transit from Visakhapatnam port to the factory which is situated at more than 50 KMs. But the simultaneous perusal of record reveals that this submission of appellant came for the first time, vide the letter of appellant dated 27.03.2015 whereas the first transfer bond got already closed on 19.01.2014 and the last transfer bond among 5 was closed on 11.02.2015. There is no explanation of the appellant about his silence for almost more than one and half year since the closure of first bond of transfer bond and for almost five months from the closure of last transfer bonds. Though the appellant has reflected grievance about violation of principles of natural justice as being not given the opportunity of hearing at the time of closure of transfer bonds but apparently and admittedly the bonds have been closed in terms of Section 67 of Customs Act, 1962. The provision makes it clear that Procedure for submission of transfer bonds and the closure thereof is not possible in the absence of the executor of the bonds who requests removal of the imported goods from one warehouse to another. Hence the allegations of the appellant are observed to be wrong - Apparently and admittedly present is not the case of provisional and the final assessment since the appellant accepted while executing the transfer bonds the noticed shortage but has failed to explain sufficient cause for the silence to contest the same for almost one and half year, the subsequent refund application is nothing but a after-thought. The noticed shortage is apparently more than 1%. This is not a fit case for refund - there are no infirmity in the order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) - appeal dismissed.
|