9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (2) TMI 403X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Judgment per: K. Raviraja Pandian, J.].- The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed against the Final Order No. 735/2007 in Appeal No. C/180/04 dated 18-6-2007 [2007 (216) E.L.T. 689 (Tribunal)] on the file of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai by formulating the following questions of law: "(a) Whether the Order of the Tribunal in confirming the lower authorities, orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls) complaining that the assessing authority had not allowed 'quantity discount', 'quality discount' and 'dispatch earning as deductions from assessable value and claimed that they were eligible for refund of duty of Rs. 3,49,077/-. The appellate authority non-suited the appellant, on the premise that the appellant had neither sought for the provisional assessment nor filed any refund claim. As ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... withstanding the fact that has been claimed by the appellant. 4. In its order, the Tribunal has stated that the memorandum of understanding on which reliance has been placed by the appellant has not been placed before the proper officer for consideration. Having recorded a finding to that effect, the Tribunal has taken into consideration of the xerox copy of the memorandum of understanding produc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y and the assessment was done on that basis. Neither of the documents disclosed any permissible discounts/rebates. Nor was any claim for deduction was made before that authority by the importer. The duty assessed by the proper officer was paid by the assessee without protest. On finding so, the Tribunal rejected the appeal. 5. As already stated, the appellant filed the bill of entry and allowed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
