Just a moment...

Report
FeedbackReport
Bars
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2003 (10) TMI 536

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....try had been submitted along with refund claim. The claim was initially rejected as the Port Weighment Certificate was not considered as authentic proof for shortage and granting refund. The CEGAT has decided your appeal vide Order No. 756/99 dtd. 9-4-99. As per Customs Refund Application (Form) Regulation 1995, Original Triplicate copy of Bill of Entry is essential for granting Refund. You have submitted Original Triplicate copy of B/E on 15-11-2000 and Modvat details on 10-1-2001. There is no delay in granting refund after submission of essential documents. As requested by you vide your letter dtd. 9-3-2002 copy of Notification No. 15/2000-N.T. dtd. 1-3-2000 is enclosed herewith." 2. At the outset, Shri Narasimha Murthy raised a pre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....;   = Rs. 36,054/- Interest collected (adjusted)               = Rs. 41,454/- Excess collected                    = Rs. 5,400/- There is an excess collection of Rs. 5,400/-. Hence you may submit pre-receipt for Rs. 5,400/- and collect the refund cheque." 3. Shri Parameswaran appearing for the appellants submitted that since the Tribunal has passed an order as early as on 9-4-99 allowing the appeal with consequential relief, it was the duty of the department to grant refund within time as stipulated under Sec. 27A of the Customs Act. He read the relevant Sec. 27A, w....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5] in support of his contention that party is entitled to refund of interest in terms of Sec. 27A of the Customs Act. 4. In support of the contention raised by the Department that no appeal lies against the letter, Shri Narasimha Murthy referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise v. M.P. Steel Corporation [2003 (154) E.L.T. 12 (S.C.)]. 5. In this context, Shri Parameswaran pointed out that since the Assistant Commissioner has issued a letter dtd. 6-2-2002, in which it was clearly said that 'the letter was issued with the approval of Commissioner of Customs, Mangalore', the party had no other alternative but to have further correspondence with the Commissioner and ultima....