TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (11) TMI 1581
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and one Bill of Entry was assessed under CTH 25210090 with duty @5% BCD (CN 12/2012-SI. No.108) + Nil rate of Addl. Duty of Customs + 3% (Education Cess) + 4% Spl. Addl. Customs Duty (CN 019/2006). The appellant paid the duty for the above mentioned Bills of Entry for home consumption. 3.2 Subsequently, the appellant has filed refund claims for Rs. 36,59,868/- under Section 27 of Customs Act, 1962 on 05.04.2013 contending that, they are entitled for concessional & preferential rate of basic Customs Duty @ 2% in accordance with the Notification No.46/2011, dated 01.06.2011 as amended by Notification No.127/2011, dated 30.12.2012 (SI. No.192) & basic duty @ 0% vide Notification No.64/2012, dated 31.12.2012 (Sl. No.192) as the goods o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a refund claim under Section 27 of Customs Act, 1962 & 2) The appellant is eligible for refund by extending the benefit of preferential rate of duty in terms of Notification No.46/2011-Customs, dated 01.06.2011 as the original Certificate of Origin is presented within the period of it validity and if the lower authority is satisfied about the eligibility of merits and all other requirements in accordance with provisions of the Customs Tariff [Determination of Origin of goods under the Preferential Trade Agreement between the Governments of Member States of the Association of Asian Nations (ASEAN) and the Republic of India] Rules, 2009. 3.5 The Department has not followed the directions of the Order-in Appeal No.141/2014-VCH, Dated ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of BPL Telecom Ltd., [2015 (325) E.L.T 467 (S.C.)] held the same view. 6. Ld. Consultant submits that judgment of Micromax Informa Tics Ltd., [2016 (335) ELT 446 (Del.)] has come to a conclusion that the decision of Flock India & Priya Blue Industries Ltd., may not apply in the situation wherein Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 has been amended with effect from 08.04.2011. 7. On careful consideration of submissions made by both sides, we find that the Bills of Entries which are under consideration were filed on 07.01.2013, 13.07.2012, 07.11.2012, 01.01.2012, 08.06.2012, Undoubtedly, appellant is eligible for the benefit of reduced/concessional and preferential rate of basic customs duty as per Notification No.46/2011 as amended ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....607 (S.C.) where the Supreme Court had held that for quantification of CVD in case of an article that has been imported it has to be presumed that the said imported article has been manufactured in India and then the amount of excise duty leviable thereon has to be ascertained for determining the extent of exemption from payment of CVD to which the importer would be entitled. 3... .... 4... .... 5... .... 6... .... 7... .... 8. In Aman Medical Products Limited v. Commissioner of Customs, Delhi (supra), a Division Bench of this Court was considering an instance of an importer having filed B/Es, paid customs duty and thereafter claimed refund under Section 27 of the Act. The question of law framed by the Court in the appeal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ia) (P.) Ltd. (supra) and Priya Blue Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Prevention) (supra) would not apply since those were cases where "there is no assessment order on dispute/contest, like as is in the present case." It was held in Aman Medical Products Limited (supra) that the assessee was entitled to maintain the refund claim notwithstanding that there was no appeal filed against the assessed B/Es. 11 ... ... 12. An important change that has been made is that a person can now claim refund of any duty or interest as long as such duty or interest was paid or borne by such person. The conditionality of such payment having been made pursuant to an order of assessment does not exist. Secondly, once an application is made unde....