9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1143X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Shri A. Cletus, ADC (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per Bench Appellants had filed 20 Bills of Entry for clearance of goods such as equipments, spares etc. and paid the duty amount of Rs. 48,92,130/- without availing benefit under Customs Notification No.21/2002-Cus. dt. 01.03.2002. Subsequently, they filed refund claims for the above amount and produced Essentiality Certificate of the Directo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed finality, the request for reassessment and refund cannot be considered. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide an order dt. 17.12.2012 (impugned order) allowed the appeal in respect of 22 Bills of Entry and issued direction to original authority to revisit the case in the light of Delhi High Court s directions. However, the lower appellate authority did not allow the appeal in respect of 7 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Tri.-Chennai), which has taken the same view, in para 5.6 thereof. He draws attention to para-5 of the Order-in-Original in page 80 of the appeal book wherein the original authority has noted that the claims appearing at S.No.12 to 18 of the list have been filed within the time limit of 6 months from the date of payment of duty as prescribed. Ld. Advocate further draws attention to page 43 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 89) ELT 247 (SC) held that when the duty is paid under the orders of Court (whether by way of an order granting stay, suspension, injunction or otherwise) pending an appeal/reference/writ petition, it will certainly be a payment under protest; in such a case, it is obvious, it would not be necessary to lodge the protest as provided by Rule 233B....." 5. In these circumstances, there cannot be any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
