TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (9) TMI 987
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... No: 33/Mumbai-III/2010 dated 17/03/2009 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai - III. 2. The appellant, M/s. Mohit World, is an importer and had imported consignment of mobile accessories vide Bill of Entry dated 14/07/2004. The said consignment was inspected by SIIB and it was doubted that the consignment was highly under-invoiced. Based on market enquiry the value of goods wer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Cell vide letter d31/05/2006 informed the Commissioner of Customs that Revenue had accepted the order of adjudication. On 15/06/2006, the appellant filed refund claim and also submitted relevant documents in support of the claim. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs was pleased to sanction the refund claim of Rs. 3,46,622/- which comprises of differential duty of Rs. 1,71,622/- penalty of Rs. 25,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....itation and is finally settled in favour of the assessee, it is deemed to have been order under protest and the provision of limitation will not apply. Relying on the Mafatlal Industries case of the apex Court, the learned Commissioner noticed that Section 27 was inserted by inserting a proviso which reads as follows: "Provided also where the duty becomes refundable as a consequence of judgment,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....appellant disputed the valuation by the Revenue and immediately filed appeal ipso facto supports the fact that the duty was paid under protest. He further, relies on the ruling of the Tribunal in the case of Harish Silk Industries vs. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs 209 (239) ELT 291 wherein it has been held that:- "The only mistake the appellants have done is that they had not paid und....