Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the imported goods could be denied refund on the footing that they were parts of general use excluded by Section XV and the proviso to Notification No. 69/87-Cus. dated 1-3-1987, and whether the department could alter the accepted classification in refund proceedings without initiating reclassification proceedings.
Analysis: The original assessment had accepted the goods under Chapter heading 84.13. In refund proceedings, the authorities changed the classification and denied the notification benefit on the basis that the goods were parts of general use, although no separate proceedings for reclassification had been initiated by show cause notice. On the record, the accepted classification treated the goods as parts of a pump, bringing them outside the category of parts of general use for exclusion from the notification.
Conclusion: The denial of refund was unsustainable, and the appellant was entitled to the notification benefit.