9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (11) TMI 1353X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me barred. 2. The facts of the case are that M/s/ Narsingh Ispat Ltd, Kolkata (herein after referred as the appellant) has imported metallurgical coke vide three Bills of dated 14.01.2015, 02.02.2015 and 23.02.2015 and the appellant claimed that at the time of importation, the assessing Group has levied Clean Energy Cess on the said goods, by re-assessing the said Bills of entry filed by them. The appellant sent letters to the assessing officers requesting for finalization of the provisional assessments. But, it was informed to them that the Bills of Entry were finally assessed and never provisionally assessed. Thereafter, the appellant submitted a letter in the CPGRAMS portal, for which a reply was given to the officers vide letter in F.N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bills of Entry. It is true that they have written to the assessing officer to issue order as required under section 17(5) of the Customs Act, after more than a year from the date of clearance of the goods imported. The submitted that there is no time limit for requesting to issue order as required under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. They were forced to write such letters since the assessing officer themselves not issued the order as required under section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. Hence, the appellant submits that the appeal cannot be rejected on time bar ground. Also, the appeal filed is with respect to the issue of chargeability of Clean Energy Cess on Metallurgical Coke imported by them. Thus, the appellant submitted that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with the claim of 'NIL' Clean Energy Cess. Thus, we observe that the evidence available on record does not indicate that the Bills of Entry were re-assessed by the assessing officers, levying Clean Energy Cess on Metallurgical Coke. On the contrary, a perusal of the Bills of Entry indicates that the appellant has filed the self assessed Bills of entry and the Clean Energy Cess was paid by them on their own assessment. 6.1. The appellant submitted that they were under the impression that the Bills of Entry were assessed provisionally. However, the appellant could not produce any evidence that the Bills of Entry were assessed provisionally. When the appellant requested for finalization of the provisional assessments, the assessing of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Bills of Entry done by the assessing officers and they are required to issue order under section 17(5) of the customs Act, 1962. 6.4. The appellant filed a grievance letter in the CPGRAMS portal, for which a reply dated 12.09.2018 was given indicating the factual position and why no order was required to be issued under Section 17(5) of the Customs act, in this case. Thus, we observe that the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has rightly rejected the appeal filed by the appellant on the ground of time bar and maintainability. As the letter dated 18.09.2018, is not an order issued under Customs Act, 1962, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order issued by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals), rejecting their appeal. 7. Accordingly, uphol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
