Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2023 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (4) TMI 1203 - CESTAT NEW DELHIPrinciples of natural justice - refund of SAD - alleged discrepancies noticed in the refund claim based whereupon the refund claim was rejected by this Tribunal - opportunity of hearing to be provided - doctrine of merger of orders - HELD THAT:- The Deficiency Memo was issued at the time of scrutiny of said refund claim on 09.04.2018 itself. But the appellants never replied to the said Deficiency Memo despite a subsequent Memo dated 03.07.2018 nor even after the issuance of the Show Cause Notice dated 27.07.2018 which proposed the rejection of refund claim for it to be incomplete and barred by time. Appellant even failed to appear before the respective Original Adjudicating Authorities when opportunities of personal hearings were given to them. The Original Adjudicating Authorities, accordingly, decided the matter ex-parte vide respective Orders-in-Original rejecting the refund claim not only for it to be barred by time but also for it to be incomplete. Though ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has discussed only one aspect of rejecting the claims i.e. time bar aspect. But it is observed that the orders of Original Authorities have been upheld by Commissioner (Appeals) resulting into merger of these orders. The perusal of Orders-in-Original is clear that those were passed ex-parte. The appellants, despite the opportunities given, never responded to Deficiency Memo nor to Show Cause Notice nor even to the notices of personal hearing. Resultantly, the deficiencies already observed at scrutiny level, continued and the refund claims were rejected on both the aspects i.e. for being incomplete and for being barred by time. Hence, the findings for refund claim to be incomplete stand confirmed by the Commissioner (Appeals) also. The discrepancies in the refund claim were noticed by the Deficiency Memo dated 09.04.2018 itself. The said Memo has been mentioned in the Orders-in-Original which got merged with the Orders-in-Appeal as have been challenged before this Tribunal. It is the same Deficiency Memo which has been mentioned in the impugned Final Order dated 21.08.2021. Hence, there was no need of serving another notice to the appellants prior rejecting their appeals for want of removal of those deficiencies. Since at the stage of fresh hearing also nothing new has been brought to this Tribunal, there is no reason to differ from the findings in the Final Order. Appeal dismissed.
|