Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2017 (1) TMI 7

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Customs Duty. The said provision mandates that duty paid in pursuance of an order of assessment or borne by the importer, can claim the same as refund. In this case, an amount of ₹ 6,06,887/- towards excise duty / additional duty of customs was paid by the respondent, since the benefit provided under notifications dated 01.03.2006 was not claimed in the Bill of Entry. On the basis of information furnished by the respondent, since the Bill of Entry was assessed by the Customs Department and the assessed duty was paid by the respondent, it cannot be said that the duty was paid by the respondent in pursuance of an order of assessment. The case of the respondent falls under the second category i.e. borne by him contained in Section 27 ib .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ng authority for reassessment of the Bill of Entry and for refund of the excess duty paid by it. The Department vide letter dated 14.06.2011 informed the respondent that the order of Bill of Entry No. 604931 dated 31.01.2010 is an appealable order. Further, in response to the letter dated 18.05.2011 of the respondent, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (refund) vide his letter dated 24.08.2011 informed the respondent that excess duty cannot be refunded until a speaking order of reassessment of the Bill of Entry is passed by the concerned Asst Commissioner. Filling aggrieved with the assessment order passed on the Bill of Entry read with letter dated 24.08.2011 of the Department; the respondent had preferred appeal before the ld. Commissi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion of filing any refund application as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Priya Blue Industries Ltd. - Vs. - Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), reported in 2004 (172) ELT 145 (S.C.). 3. Heard the ld. A.R. for Revenue and examined the case records. 4. It is an admitted fact on record that the goods namely, USB Modem imported by the respondent is classified under CTH 85176292 and such classification claimed by the respondent has also been accepted by the assessing authority, by assessing the Bill of Entry at 'Nil' rate of Customs duty. However, the benefit of exemption in respect of Central Excise duty/CVD and Additional Duty of Customs provided under the Notification No. 6/2006 -C.E. dated 01.03.2006 as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... was preferred before the Commissioner (Appeals). Appeal against the said letter having been filed within a period of sixty days from the date of its communication in our opinion, there is no delay in filing appeal before the ld. Commissioner (Appeals). Thus, we do not find any merits in the contention of revenue that filing of appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) is barred by the limitation of time. 6. Section 27 ibid provides the modalities and procedures for claiming refund of Customs Duty. The said provision mandates that duty paid in pursuance of an order of assessment or borne by the importer, can claim the same as refund. In this case, an amount of ₹ 6,06,887/- towards excise duty / additional duty of customs was paid b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssioner (Appeals) against the assessed Bill of Entry. Further, the alternative provided in Section 27 ibid i.e. borne by him was not the subject matter of dispute before the Hon ble Supreme Court. Considering the second alternative provided in Section 27 ibid, the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Aman Medical Products Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Delhi reported in 2010 (250) E.L.T. 30 (Del.) have held that duty borne by the person can claim refund under Section 27 ibid. The relevant paragraphs in the said judgment are extracted herein below:- 4. If therefore we refer to language of Section 27, it is more than clear that the duty which is paid is not necessarily pursuant to an order of assessment but can also be borne by him .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates