2017 (5) TMI 1124

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....leared the goods. Subsequently, they realized that they were eligible for concessional rate of CVD at the rate of 6% as per Notification No. 2/2011 -Cus dated 1.3.2011. Accordingly, they filed refund claim for the CVD which has been paid in excess of the concessional notification. The original authority vide its order dated 23.11.2013 rejected the refund claims on the ground that they will not be entitled to refund since the assessment order has not been challenged. He relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Priya Blue Industries vs. Commissioner [2004 (172) ELT 145 (SC)] as well as Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2000 (120) ELT 0285 (SC)] The order of the original authority was challenged before Commissioner (App....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rmatics Ltd. is reproduced for ready reference: "13. As far as the present case is concerned, there was indeed no assessment order as such passed by the customs authorities. Although under Section 2(ii) of the Act, the word 'assessment' includes a self-assessment, the clearance of the goods upon filing of the B/E and payment of duty is not per se an 'assessment order' in the context of Section 27(1)(i) as it stood prior to 8th April, 2011, particularly if such duty has not been paid under protest. In any event, after 8th April, 2011, as noticed hereinbefore, as long as customs duty or interest has been paid or borne by a person, a claim for refund made by such person under Section 27(1) of the Act as it now stands, will have to be entertai....