9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 355X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pugned order wherein the refund claim of Rs. 1,89,222/- filed under Notification No.102/2007-Cus dated 14.9.2007 by the appellant has been rejected on the ground that the imported goods were sold prior to issuance of out of charge order by the Customs. 2. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Ashwin Corporation Vs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal in the case of Radius Infotech's case (supra). In similar circumstances, the Tribunal observed as follows:- "5. On hearing both the sides and on perusal of the appeal records, it is clear that the refund of Rs. 90,106/- was rejected only on the ground that the invoice dated 21.4.2013 is prior to the date of Bill of Entry. The Original Authority recorded that it is doubtful as to whether the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eady been settled by this Tribunal in the Ashwin Corporation (supra), therefore, I hold that merely the goods were sold prior to issuance of out of charge order by the Customs, the refund cannot be rejected. Therefore, the impugned order deserves no merits quo rejection of refund claim of Rs. 1,89,222/-, hence modified accordingly. In result, the appeal is allowed with consequential relief. (dict ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
