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

YU Televentures Pvt. Ltd. Versus Union Of India & Ors

2016 (8) TMI 184 - DELHI HIGH COURT

Claim of refund of excess CVD paid on import of mobile handsets including cellular phones. - mobile handsets including cellular phones - Held that:- it is not open to the Authority to refuse to consider the application for refund only because an appeal has not been filed against the assessment order. - With the Petitioner having already placed all the relevant documents on record and with the only reason for rejection of the refund application being the untenable ground of alleged failure by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

-8-2016 - S. MURALIDHAR & NAJMI WAZIRI JJ. Petitioner Through: Mr. Tarun Gulati, Mr. Shashi Mathews, Mr. Sparsh Bhargava, Mr. Ankit Sachdeva, Mr. Kishore Kunal, Mr. Manish Rastogi and Ms. Rachana Yadav, Advocates Respondents Through: Ms. Saroj Bidawat, Advocate for Respondent No.1 Mr. Pramod Kumar Rai, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Deepak Anand, Junior Standing Counsel for Respondent Nos. 2, 3 & 4. O R D E R Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.: 1. Notice. Ms. Saroj Bidawat accepts notice on behalf .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ber 263A and condition no. 16 of Notification No. 12/2012-CE dated 17th March 2012 (as amended). 4. The Petitioner company sells, inter alia, electronic products such as mobile phones etc. As part of its business activities, the Petitioner imported mobile handsets including cellular phones. 10 Bills of Entry (B/Es) were filed by it in January 2015 - February 2015. On these B/Es, the Petitioner paid additional customs duty (commonly known as countervailing duty or CVD) @ 6%, even though the Petit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

T credit on inputs or capital goods was interpreted by the Supreme Court in SRF Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs 2015 (318) ELT 607 (SC). The Supreme Court explained that for quantification of CVD in case of imported goods, it would have to be presumed that the imported goods were manufactured in India and the excise duty leviable thereon would then have to be ascertained for determining the extent of exemption from payment of CVD to which the importer would be entitled. It is stated that review .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

detailing the amount of excess duty paid under Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975; c) Details of Customs House Agents; d) Copy of judgment of the Supreme Court in SRF Ltd. v. CC; e) An affidavit stating that the claim for refund is not barred by limitation and the refund amount would not be used in subsequent refund applications. 7. The claim was examined by the Deputy Commissioner (Refunds) (Respondent No. 4) and a memorandum dated 1st February, 2016 was issued pointing out that: 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

inter alia pointing out that under Section 27 of the Act there was no requirement of getting the B/E re-assessed for the purposes of claiming refund. Three decisions of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal were referred to by the Petitioner. 9. It may be mentioned at this stage that in its recent decision in Micromax Informatics Ltd. v. Union of India 2016 (335) E.L.T. 446 (Del.), this Court clarified the legal position that for the purpose of claiming a refund under Section 27 .....

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 conditionality of such payment having been made pursuant to an order of assessment does not exist. Secondly, once an application is made under Section 27(1) of the Act, it is incumbent on the authority concerned to make an order under Section 27(2) determining if any duty or interest as claimed is refundable to the applicant. The proviso to Section 27(2) of the Act sets out the instances where refund should be paid to the claimant instead of being credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund. The 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

into account in deciding the application for refund. If such assessment order has been reviewed or modified in appeal such further order will obviously be taken into account. In other words, under Section 27 of the Act, as it now stands, it is not open to an authority to refuse to consider the application for refund only because no appeal has been filed against the assessment order, if there is one. 10. On 3rd March, 2016 Respondent No. 4 issued another memorandum calling upon the Petitioner to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion of the Supreme Court in SRF Ltd (supra) was concerned, Respondent No. 4 chose to highlight in bold letters in the impugned order the fact that the Department had filed a review petition in the Supreme Court which had been admitted and was pending consideration. As far as the decision of this Court in Micromax Informatics (supra) was concerned, Respondent No.4 again highlighted in bold letters in the impugned order that the above order of the Hon ble High Court has not been accepted by the De .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

payment of customs duty under section 27 (1) (a) of the Customs Act, 1962. I find there is no proof of excess payment of custom duty in respect of Bill of entries filed by the party from the period 02.01.2015 to 10.02.2015 as these are finally assessed Bills of Entry and the party has also failed to submit the reassessed Bills of Entry as per benefit claimed by them . Thus the claim is not admissible and liable to be rejected. 12. The mere fact that the Department was contemplating or in fact fi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rved as under: 6. Sri Reddy is perhaps right in saying that the officers were not actuated by any mala fides in passing the impugned orders. They perhaps genuinely felt that the claim of the assessee was not tenable and that, if it was accepted, the Revenue would suffer. But what Sri Reddy overlooks is that we are not concerned here with the correctness or otherwise of their conclusion or of any factual malafides but with the fact that the officers, in reaching in their conclusion, by-passed two .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

icial issues before them, revenue officers are bound by the decisions of the appellate authorities; The order of the Appellate Collector is binding on the Assistant Collectors working within his jurisdiction and the order of the Tribunal is binding upon the Assistant Collectors and the Appellate Collectors who function under the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The principles of judicial discipline require that the orders of the higher appellate authorities should be followed unreservedly by the su .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

at, if he accepted the assessee's contention, the department would lose revenue and would also have no remedy to have the matter rectified is also incorrect..... The position now, therefore, is that, if any order passed by an Assistant Collector or Collector is adverse to the interests of the Revenue, the immediately higher administrative authority has the power to have the matter satisfactorily resolved by taking up the issue to the Appellate Collector or the Appellate Tribunal as the case .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tice of the Board or the Collector so as to enable appropriate proceedings being taken under Section.35-E (1) or (2) to keep the interests of the department alive. If the officer's view is the correct one, it will no doubt be finally upheld and the Revenue will get the duty, though after some delay which such procedure would entail. 8. We have dealt with this aspect at some length, because it has been suggested by the learned Additional Solicitor General that the observations made by the Hig .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

mind in future and the utmost regard should be paid by the adjudicating authorities and the appellate authorities to the requirements of judicial discipline and the need for giving effect to the orders of the higher appellate authorities which are binding on them. 13. In E.I. Dupont India Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India 2014 (305) ELT 282 (Guj.) the Gujarat High Court referred to the law explained in Legrand (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India 2007 (216) ELT 678 (Bom.), and held that a failure to fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tendered, we close the proceedings so far as the proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act are concerned. 14. Learned counsel for the Respondents were unable to defend the impugned order which has been clearly passed in defiance of the binding decisions of the Supreme Court and this Court. As already noted there was no justification for Respondent No.4 to ignore the binding decisions only because an appeal was filed in which no stay was granted. As far as the Department's review petition .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

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


|| 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