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 →

The Commissioner C & CE, Visakhapatnam Versus M/s Atlantic shipping Pvt. Ltd.

2016 (7) TMI 357 - CESTAT HYDERABAD

Refund of excess duty paid on actual consumption of bunkers on the vessel during coastal trade - Unjust enrichment - Held that:- The main contention raised by the appellants is that the respondents did not furnish a Chartered Accountant Certificate to establish that the incidence of duty has not passed on. On examination of records, it is seen that this submission is factually incorrect. The respondents have furnished the Chartered Accountants Certificate dated 10-03-2012. Further, the Board Cir .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he respondent shipping company after coastal conversion of its vessel MT Kyriakoula from foreign run to coastal run on 30-08-2010 at Kakinada Port, filed Bill of Entry No.416 dated 03-09-2010 in terms of Boards Circular No.58/97 dated 06-11-1997 for payment of duty on estimated quantity of bonded bunkers and consumables for consumption on the said vessel during coastal trade. After provisional assessment of the said Bill of Entry, the respondents paid duty deposit amounting to ₹ 17,87,358/ .....

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 appellants and as per Order-in-Original dated 16-11-2011, the Dy.Commissioner of Customs, Kakinada sanctioned the refund of ₹ 1,94,759/- 3. Being aggrieved, the department filed appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Visakhapatnam. However, vide the impugned order the Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the sanction of refund. Hence the present appeal filed by Revenue mainly on three grounds. Firstly that the claim of refund is hit by the doctrine of unjust enrichment. That the D .....

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, that the appellant has not produced a Chartered Accountants Certificate to establish that duty was not charged on their customers whether directly or indirectly. 4. The learned AR Shri G.S.Saraj appearing for the Revenue strongly argued the above contentions raised in the grounds of appeal. He submitted that the respondents have not established that the incidence of duty has not been passed on and that therefore, as per Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, the refund is liable to be rejected. .....

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