9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... SAD) @ 4% as applicable and applied for refund of SAD under Notification No. 102/97-Cus. Their application for refund was rejected by the lower authority on the following grounds: a) Para 2 (a) of the notification 102/97-Cus requires the importer to pay all duties, including additional duty of customs leviable thereon to be paid but the importer had not paid the BCD and CVD as they were exempt for these goods imported from Bangladesh. b) Para 2(b) of the notification 102/97-Cus specifies that the importer, while issuing invoice for sale of the said goods, shall specifically indicate in the invoice that in respect of the goods covered therein, no credit of additional duty of customs levied under sub-section (5) of Section 3 of the Custo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... were imported through ICD Petrapole in West Bengal and the jurisdictional customs officer is Assistant/Deputy Commissioner, Petrapole lCS with whom the refund application should have been filed. Instead, the importer filed the refund application with the Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise, Vizianagaram. It is the contention of the Ld. DR that this is a basic condition in the notification and the refund sanctioned violating it and the Order-in-Appeal thereon upholding such a sanction are liable to be set aside. It is not the case of the Department that the assessee is not entitled to the SAD refund but only that it was sanctioned by an unauthorised officer and hence needs to be set aside. 5. I have heard the arguments of the Ld. DR a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and conversely demands are raised only by the officers having jurisdiction. If such a scheme of things is not followed, there will be chaos and confusion with any officer raising a demand or sanctioning a refund to any assessee. It is also an essential condition for sanction of refund as per the Notification No. 102/97-Cus. However, both the assessee and the departmental officers were oblivious of this factor until the refund was sanctioned by the Deputy Commissioner based on the first order of the Commissioner (Appeals). The result is that refund is sanctioned by an officer without the jurisdiction. As that there is no dispute about the merits of the admissibility of the refund, there is no monetary loss to the Revenue. 7. The technical f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
