TMI Blog2009 (6) TMI 782X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act. At that stage, the assessee submitted that, as per the Hon ble Supreme Court s judgment in the case of CCE, Bhubaneshwar-I v. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. 2003 (154) E.L.T. 343 (S.C.), cooking coal was not to be considered to be manufactured in India and, therefore, no CVD was leviable on like goods when imported into India. Significantly, this point was recorded in the bills of entry. Later on, when the matters were taken up for finalisation of assessment, the assessing authority choose to finalise the provisional assessments without any change. Meanwhile, the duty assessed was paid under protest. Later on, the assessee filed refund claims, which were sanctioned by the proper officer of customs on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty paid by the assessee was allowed by the Bench after distinguishing the case on hand from the case of Priya Blue Industries Ltd. (supra) etc. On the other hand, the learned SDR refers to the Apex Court s judgment in a review petition filed by M/s. Priya Blue Industries Ltd. vide 2004 (172) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.) and submits that the original authority could not have sat in judgment over the finalisation of assessments made by the competent officer of customs. The assessments were not appealed against. In the circumstances, according to the SDR, the ruling in Priya Blue Industries (supra) is squarely applicable to the instant case. 3. After considering the submissions, I agree with the view taken by the learned SDR on the facts of this case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the authority passing the order-of-taking the decision. Such mistakes can be corrected by the authority concerned at any time either suo motu or when pointed out by the aggrieved party. I have already found that the claim of the assessee for exemption from CVD on the strength of the Supreme Court s judgment in TISCO case was expressly noted in the bills of entry. That claim, however, was not considered by the assessing authority at the stage of provisional assessments or even at the later stage of finalisation of assessments. It can hardly be said to be a case of arithmetical error, nor of slip/omission. Section 154 of the Customs Act, therefore, cannot be pressed into service in the instant case. For this very reason, the Tribunal s de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
