2017 (7) TMI 1020

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rt payment of Rs. 12 Lakh. According to the learned counsel, various aspects were raised before the Tribunal, the same were required to be prima facie dealt with by the Tribunal. It was also the case of the present appellant that the appellant is entitled for refund of more than Rs. 25 Lakh. Though the arguments were recorded, the same were not even dealt with prima facie by the Tribunal. 3 The learned counsel for the Revenue supports the order and submits that the Tribunal had reduced the amount of part payment. The various arguments were considered while passing the order. 4 This court in Writ Petition Nos.3354 of 2016 with 3355 of 2016 in M/s.Sun Tan Trading Co. Limited vs. The State of Maharashtra & Others, under order dated 3 rd May ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt to its mind and which have been dealt with or decided in Appeal, either by the First Appellate Authority or by it. In the present case, beyond referring to what transpired before the Settlement Commission and making a sweeping observation that the petitioners/appellants had adopted a modus operandi of under invoicing, which was subsequently unearthed by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), that the Tribunal concludes that the quantum of customs duty which should have been part of the sale price of the goods imported and sold by the petitioners cannot be said to be inclusive of the quantum of customs duty evaded and subsequently unearthed by the DRI. We are at a loss and are left to guess as to which Section or provision of the ....