Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Customs, Chennai Versus M/s Medreich Sterilab Ltd.

2015 (11) TMI 819 - CESTAT CHENNAI

Refund claim - benefit of the customs notification No. 21/2003 dated 01.03.2003 - Commissioner held that refund can be granted if its proven under certification of ACCE that the impugned goods were used fully for intended purposes as per the Registration Certificate - Held that:- Bill of Entry No. 550344 was filed on 28.06.2003, and the imported consignment was cleared on 30.06.2003. Registration under Rule 3 was done on 14.07.2003 and the application under Rule 4 was filed on 18.07.2003. All th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

- Dated:- 14-9-2015 - R Periasami, Member (T) And P K Choudhary, Member (J) For the Appellant : Ms Indira Sisupal, AC (AR) For the Respondent : Shri N Anand, Adv ORDER Per P K Choudhary In this case the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) vide OIA C.Cus. No. 641/2004 dated 31.08.2004 had allowed the assessees appeal with consequential benefit. The Commissioner (Appeals) in his order has observed that the importer is entitled for the benefit of the customs notification No. 21/2003 dated 01.03.2003 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ated 28.06.2003. On assessment under CTH 29329900 and padi duty @ 25%+16%+4% and paid ₹ 18,84,953/-. Later on the assessee claimed that they were eligible for concessional rate of duty @ 5% under Sl.No. 80(B) of Customs Notification No. 21/2003 dated 01.03.2003 (Sl.No. 3 of list 3) and filed the refund claim of ₹ 16,99,426/-. The respondent assessee further claimed that due to non-availability of requisite documents, and pressure of time, they cleared the goods by payment of duty on .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

fication No. 21/2003. Aggrieved by the above OIO the importer preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide OIA, C.Cus. 641/2004 dated 31.08.2004 allowed the appeal by annulling the order in original. 4. Ld. AC, AR reiterated the grounds of appeal and filed copies of Notification No. 36/96-Cus (N.T) dated 23.07.1996 as amended of Customs (Import of Goods at Concessional Rate of Duty for Manufacture of Excisable Goods) Rules, 1996 and a list containing effective rates of basic and a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e facts before the Central Excise Authorities by stating the the intend to import the material(in future), whereas they had already imported and cleared the material on payment of duty on merits.The Ld.AR relied on the following decisions in this regard. 1. Samtel Color Ltd. Vs. CCE, Meerut 2000 (126) ELT 1256 (Tri.) 2. CCE, New Delhi Vs. Hari Chand Shri Gopal 2010 (260) ELT 3 (S.C.) 5. The Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent assessee mentioned that they have claimed refund under S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ennai 2007 (218) ELT 547 (Tri.-Chen.) 2. CCE, Chandigarh-I Vs. J.C.T. Electronics Ltd. 2011 (267) ELT 41 (P & H) 6. On hearing both sides and on perusal of records, we find that the Bill of Entry No. 550344 was filed on 28.06.2003, and the imported consignment was cleared on 30.06.2003. Registration under Rule 3 was done on 14.07.2003 and the application under Rule 4 was filed on 18.07.2003. All these requirements are merely procedural and the intent of these statute is to ensure that the us .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y. (2) The registration shall contain particulars about the name and address of the manufacturer, the excisable goods produced in his factory, the nature and description of imported goods used in the manufacture of such goods. (3) The {Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise} shall issue a certificate to the manufacturer indicating the particulars referred to in sub-rule (2). Rule 4. Application by the manufacturer to obtain the benefit. (1) A manufactur .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ication specified under sub-rule (1), either in respect of a particular consignment, or indicating his estimated requirement of such goods (for a period not exceeding one year). (2) The manufacturer shall also give undertaking on the application that the imported goods shall be used for the intended purpose. (3) The application shall be countersigned by the {Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise or Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise} who shall certify therein that the manufacturer is regis .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version