2023 (9) TMI 23 - AT - Customs

Tribunal grants refund for duty paid on timber logs, ensuring fair competition

M/s New Timber Industries Versus Commissioner of Customs, Mangalore

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing a refund of Rs. 1,04,111 for the 4% additional duty paid on imported timber logs subject to ... Refund of Additional Duty - rejection on the ground that said amount related to quantity of 56.66 CBM sold after processing - HELD THAT:- The dispute in the present appeal is settled by this Tribunal also in the matter of M/S ARAVIND TRADERS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS-COCHIN-CUS [2021 (7) TMI 100 - CESTAT BANGALORE], where it was held that impugned order holding that the appellant has violated the Condition D of the N/N. 102/2007 dated 14.09.2007 is not sustainable. The appellant is entitled for the refund of Rs. 1,04,111/- which was rejected by the Adjudication Authority on the ground that said amount related to quantity of 56.66 CBM sold after processing - appellant is entitled for the refund of Rs.1,04,111/- after deducting Rs.8,329/- against unsold goods with interest in accordance with law. Appeal allowed in part. Issues involved: The issue involves the eligibility of the appellant for the refund of 4% additional duty paid at the time of import for timber logs that were subsequently subject to processing like sawing and cutting.Summary:Issue 1: Eligibility for refund of additional dutyThe appellant, engaged in the import and supply of timber logs, imported teakwood and paid 4% additional duty amounting to Rs. 2,96,524. After selling a significant portion of the goods, the appellant applied for a refund of the additional duty paid. The Adjudication Authority allowed a partial refund and rejected a portion of the claim, stating that the goods were subject to processing and thus ineligible for the refund. The Appellate Authority upheld this decision. However, the appellant argued that no manufacturing took place, and the classification of the goods remained the same even after processing. Citing relevant judgments, the appellant contended that the refund should be granted to maintain a level playing field for domestic industry. The Tribunal, after considering the submissions, held that the appellant is entitled to a refund of Rs. 1,04,111 after deducting Rs. 8,329 against unsold goods, with interest as per the law.Conclusion:The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, allowing the refund of Rs. 1,04,111 after considering the facts and submissions from both parties, and in line with previous judgments and legal principles.