Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Suren International Ltd. Versus Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi

2015 (4) TMI 1071 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Refund claim of interest - Under Section 28AA - Appellant was asked to pay interest on delayed payment of duty under Section 28AA of the Customs Act, 1962 with effect from 29-9-2003, i.e., three months after the date of passing of the Order-in-Original and the Department started processing Bills of Entry in year 2005 and therefore, therefore, he claimed that the interest should not have been demanded and recovered before finalizing Bills of Entry in the year 2005 - Held that: the interest become .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed the date of the adjudication order. Therefore, refund claim not granted. - Decided against the appellant - C/317/2009 - Final Order No. A/51213/2015-CU(DB) - Dated:- 1-4-2015 - G. Raghuram, President and Shri R.K. Singh, Member (T) Shri Nipun Kumar, Director, for the Appellant. Shri B.B. Sharma, AR, for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : R.K. Singh, Member (T)]. - Appeal has been filed against Order-in-Appeal No. CC(A)Cus/ICD/42/2009, dated 23-2-2009 which upheld the Order-in-Original dated 2 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of Entry filed in July, 2001 (30-7-2001 and 31-7-2001) as also those lying in godown were seized as they were found to be misdeclared. The case was eventually adjudicated by Commissioner of Customs, ICD, TKD vide Order-in-Original dated 30-6-2003. The appellant filed appeal against the said Order-in-Original and the Tribunal stayed the operation thereof. The stay was vacated on 13-5-2005. The appellant filed appeal before High Court but no stay was granted. The goods were released after the appe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d therefore, the interest should not have been demanded and recovered before finalizing Bills of Entry in the year 2005. 4. During the hearing, the appellant reiterated the same contention. 5. We have considered the appellant s contentions and the facts and circumstances of the case. The primary authority in the impugned order has clearly noted as under : I find that the party has filed the refund claim on 28-2-2008 and as per party s own submission, the amount of interest was paid 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

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version