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 →

M/s Suren International Versus CC, New Delhi

2016 (5) TMI 187 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Denial of refund claim - Rent paid on behalf of the Revenue to CWC warehouse - Seizure of some indigenous goods - Appellant paid duty, redemption fine and penalties and sought release of the goods as per adjudication order but while releasing the goods, the appellant was asked to pay an amount on account of rent to Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), NCH, New Delhi which was paid by the appellant under protest. - Held that:- in adjudication order, the appellant is asked to pay redemption f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f Customs (Preventive), NCH, New Delhi under protest, the said amount is refundable to the appellant as the appellant has no liability to pay rent. Therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law and accordingly set aside. - Decided in favour of appellant with consequential relief - Appeal No. C/274/2009-CU(SM) - F. Order No. 53745/2015 - Dated:- 4-12-2015 - MR. ASHOK JINDAL, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) For the Petitioner : Shri R. Santhanam, Shri Bharat Agarwal, Shri Rishabh Ostwar, 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

ed thereof. During the pendency of adjudication without intimating to the appellant, Revenue shifted the goods in question to CWC warehouse. After adjudication took place, the goods were allowed to be redeemed by the appellant on payment of redemption fine and various penalties thereon along with duty. When the appellant asked for release of the goods on payment of duty, redemption fine and penalty as imposed thereon by the adjudicating authority, the appellant was asked to pay an amount of 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

been paid to CWC warehouse for storage of goods owned by the appellant, therefore, the appellant is required to pay rent. In these circumstances, the refund claim is not maintainable. On appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals), the refund claim was rejected on the ground that as the appellant has not challenged the adjudication order which has attained finality. Therefore, they are not entitled for refund claim. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before me. 3. The ld. Counsel f .....

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