9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 971X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the Respondent. ORDER The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order wherein the refund claim was rejected by both the lower authorities. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant being a Research Institute imported a consignment of goods declared as "Telescope Valve and Handling Equipment" under an agreement with their foreign supplier and filed Bill of Entry on 18-9-2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tage was reported at that time, Therefore, after five months after the clearance of the said goods from the customs, claiming that certain equipments were missing are not tenable." Accordingly, the refund claim was rejected by both the lower authorities. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant is before me. 3. Heard both sides. 4. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... obtained a certificate from the supplier to that effect also. 5. On the other hand, the learned A.R. opposes the contention of the .learned Counsel and submits that although these equipments came later-on without any consideration but their refund claim is barred by limitation as they filed the Bill of Entry and also paid duty without receiving the goods. And they filed the refund claim on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the appellant is rightly made within time. Further, I find that the appellant has not received the missing equipments and to that effect they have obtained a certificate from the supplier of the equipments. I also noticed that the appellant has not paid any amount over and above the agreed prices. In these circumstances, the appellant is entitled for the refund claim. Accordingly, I set asid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
