2017 (8) TMI 1261

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ally fixed by Notification No.52/2006-Cus dt.31.5.2006, they paid ADD of Rs. 7,41,775/-. Later as per final Notification No.121/2006 dt.26.12.2006, the Government finalized the ADD which was reduced. As per the final notification, appellants had to pay ADD of Rs. 93,690.48 only. They filed refund claim for the excess amount of Rs. 6,48,084.52 and the same was rejected by original authority stating that the appellant had not requested for re-assessment of bill of entry. The refund claim is premature and that the claim can be considered only after bill of entry is reassessed by an order of appropriate appellate authority. Against this, the appellant approached the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the rejection of refund stating that the refu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s is in excess of the anti-dumping duty as so reduced." It is very much clear from the law laid in the above sub section that in case by final notification, the ADD is reduced, the excess paid is to be refunded. The Larger Bench decision (supra) squarely covers the issue. The relevant portion is reproduced as under:- "9. It is common case that the final fixation of anti-dumping duty on PVC Resin imported from South Korea was covered by Notification 4/94 dated 18-1-1994. The moment that notification was issued it was the bounden duty of the Central Government to refund so much of the anti-dumping duty which had been collected as was in excess of the anti- dumping duty finally fixed therein. It means that the Government of India should have....