Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (12) TMI 1470

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ,35,238/- (Duty Rs.13,95,236/- + Redemption Fine Rs.1,00,000/- + Penalty Rs.1,40,000/-) accrued as consequential relief arising out of Order-in-Appeal dated 28.05.2023 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), CGST, Ludhiana. The Appellant had filed Bill of Entry No. 9998886 dated 07.06.2017 for import of polyster semi furnished double ply blanket size 234cms X240 cms. and bed sheets size 225 cms. X 230 cms. (hereinafter referred to as the impugned goods) which were self-assessed under Chapter Sub-heading No.63014000 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The officer of SIIB after detailed examination, have drawn sample which were sent to Textile Committee for examination. The Textile Committee, Ludhiana reported that impugned goods were Other Pile F .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he present appeal. 3. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. 4. Learned Authorized Representative for the appellant submits that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has not appreciated the facts and the law. He further submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in the impugned order holding that the provisions of Section 27(2) are not applicable in the instant case as the duty charged was not a duty and were charged under authority of law. He further submits that the entire amount paid by the appellant is nothing but Excise duty only and not a deposit. He further submits that the Customs duty was collected from the respondent under the authority of law. He further submit .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d findings on each issue. Here it is appropriate to reproduce the relevant findings recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals) which are reproduced herein below: "4.10 I find that the certificate of Charted Accountant holds good sanctity and should not be neglected as such. It may be noted that the Chartered Accountant hold license issued by the ICAL which is an institution created by the Act of the Parliament i.e. Chartered Accountants Act, 1949. The Certificate of the CA is admissible as conclusive evidence acceptable at different platform and even by the appellate forum. Further, the Hon'ble Tribunal in the case of Gopi Krishna Processors Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE cited as 2007 (210) ELT 529 (Del.) held that the charted accountant being an expe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... itted - Commissioner (Appeals) confirmed rejection on the ground of non-production of costing of product HELD When authenticity and genuineness of certificate not doubted and no material available on record to discard CA's certificate, there is no need to furnish cost of material and pricing of contract-Orders set aside - Section 11B of Central Excise Act, 1944 (paras 6,7,8) 4.13 1 find that refund sanctioning authority treated the redemption fine and penalty at par with duty and held that refund on account of R.F and Penalty also comes under the preview of unjust enrichment and transferred the whole amount of refund including RF and Penalty into consumer welfare fund. The refund sanctioning authority failed to give any reasoning that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... assed on to customers - Bar of unjust enrichment rightly held as not applicable - Impugned order upheld - Section 27 of Customs Act, 1962. 4.15 It is prudent to note that any amount collected by the department in excess is amount collected without any authority of law and in a way amount to enriching the exchequer against the principles laid down under Article 265 of the Constitution of India. Accordingly excess payment made or collected without the authority is not also hit by the doctrine of limitation as given under Section 11 B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, and also is not covered under the said section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Following judgments are also worth looking into: A) Judgement of Hon'ble Madras High C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates