2015 (10) TMI 912

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ORDER The precise contention of the appellant is that the finished goods and inputs lying in stock at the time of de-bonding have suffered CVD for which the finished goods shall not be dutiable further. The appellant has claimed that on value addition it had paid the duty, adjusting the CVD paid as input credit. Therefore, set off of CVD against the ultimate duty liability cannot be denied ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ng does not appear to be unreasonable since such additional duty of customs was not refunded to the appellant in terms of section 3 of Customs Tariff Act, 1975. No doubt, the finished goods were not inputs, but in absence of refund of additional duty of customs to the appellant, adjusting that against ultimate excise duty liability would not defeat the spirit of law since no set off would result i....