9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut gave some relief as regard interest to the appellant. 2. Since the issue involved in all the four appeals is identical, therefore, all the four appeals are being disposed of by this common order. 3. For sake of convenience, the facts of appeal No.648/2009 are taken. The appellants have an oil refinery at the above referred address in Mangalore where crude oil is refined and diverse kind of petroleum products are manufactured. They import crude for the above purposes and store them in the storage tanks approved under Section 58 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellants had imported crude oil and filed into Bond Bills of Entry in respect of 26 CRs as listed in the Order-in-Original No.2/08 supra and 6 CRs as mentioned in Order-in-Origina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o-Bond Bills of Entry and related Ex-Bills of Entry, it was noticed that an amount of Rs. 1,73,30,309/- in respect of 26 CRs covered under OIO No.2/2008 and Rs. 21,98,424/- in respect of 6 CRs covered under OIO 1/08 was short levied. Accordingly, two show-cause notices both dated 17.9.2007 was issued proposing to finalise the provisional assessment under Section 18(2) of Customs Act, 1962 based on transaction value and demand the above short paid duty along with interest as applicable. After following the due process, the original authority confirmed the demand and aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (A), who substantially upheld the Order-in-Original; hence, the present appeals. 4. Heard both the pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It is the submission of the appellant that the demurrage charges are not includable in the assessable value or cargo imported prior to 26.9.2006 whereas the adjudicating authority has made applicable from 2.3.2001 as per CBEC Circular No.26/2006 dated 26.9.2006. The appellant had also disputed the method adopted for determining shore tank receipt quantity as no deduction is allowed to free water content while calculating the shore tank quantity of crude oil which caused accounting problems as there is a difference in the appellant s calculation and the department s calculation. Since all the issues cited supra have been settled by the apex court in the appellant s own case by the decision cited supra, wherein the Hon'ble apex court has obse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
