TMI Blog1984 (3) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HI . The consignment was two boxes containing parts of motor graders. The appellant applied to the Assistant Collector for refund of duty on three grounds. Ground 1 - The exchange rate applied was incorrect. Ground 2 - That the goods were assessable under Notification No. 35/79-Cus. dated 15-2-1979. Ground 3 - The customs duty which had been paid on short supplied items needs to be refunded. The Assistant Collector admitted the claim for refund on ground 1 3, granting refund of Rs. 9,995.80 and Rs. 3,937.66 under the two items. 3. In respect of ground 2, he said that the claimants had not produced documents called for by the Custom House and so he rejected this claim. 4. The Appellate Collector in his Order No. C3/1105/1981 d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... refund on account of auxiliary duty, and on account of the fact that the assessable value for purposes of calculation of countervailing duty had not been correctly calculated. 8. The learned counsel for the department opposed the appeal saying that notification No. 129/80-Cus. can take effect only from 1-7-1980, the date of its issue. Even if it contains explanatory memorandums that are supposed to clarify the scope and intentions of the amended Notification No. 35/79, the clarification is an amendment, and therefore, like all amendments can have effect only from the date of its issue. It cannot be employed with retrospective effect and he quoted a number of judgments and authorities. He, therefore, declared that the appeal deserved onl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and (2) the part imported for that article. Only the commodity in (1) must fall under the listed headings of the exemption notification No. 35/79-Cus. We, therefore, consider that the goods if they are Designed for articles that fall in the specified headings should qualify for exemption even under the old unamended Notification No. 35/79-Cus. 10. We accordingly remand this case to the Assistant Collector to redetermine the matter and satisfy himself that the articles for which the parts are meant did fall under the listed headings. We have to adopt this procedure as neither the representative of the appellant nor the learned counsel for the department was able to tell us whether the articles for which the parts were meant fell under th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
