TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 147X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that:- Following the decision in case of AUDIOPLUS (2010 (11) TMI 361 - CESTAT, MUMBAI) that there is no bar of time limit as per the Notification No. 102/07- Customs. The only bar has come with effect from Notification No, 93/08- Customs. Therefore, any import prior to 01.08.08, there is no bar of time limit as applicable – In favour of assessee Unjust Enrichment – Held that:- Appellants did ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustoms dated 14.09.07 vide which the additional duty paid by them as per the following chart. S.No. Refund claim No. Date BOE No. Date TR-6 Challan No. Date Refund Claim(Rs.) Sales invoice No. Date charging Sales Tax Vat amount charged in the sales invoice VAT return date evidencing payment of VAT 1 S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1.3.08 1,98,504 77,698/- 61,680/- 20.05.08 21.04.08 21.04.08 For S.No. 1, the refund claim was rejected as same is barred by limitation as per the Notification No. 93/08-Customs dated 01.08.08, as the same is to be filed within the period of one year. Rest of the refund claims i.e. S.Nos. 2 to 5 were rejected on the ground of unjust enrichment as the appellants did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r S.No. 1 the appellants are entitled for refund claim on limitations. As the said refund claim was not considered for unjust enrichment which is to be examined by the adjudicating authority. For rest of the refund claims, as it is the finding of the adjudicating authority as well as the Commissioner (A), the appellants did not produce the required documents for their satisfaction that the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
