TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (5) TMI 1302
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....963 both dated 29.03.2016 for the clearance of Polished Porcelain Tiles. The Central Government vide Notification No. 12/2016 Cus. (ADD) dated 29.03.2016 notified Anti-Dumping Duty on Polished Porcelain Tiles. Accordingly the appellant self assessed the Bill of Entry and paid the duties of Customs including Anti-Dumping Duty to the tune of Rs. 13,36,669/- (Rupees Thirteen Lakhs Thirty Six Thousand Six Hundred and Sixty Nine only) and Rs. 7,74,431/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs Seventy Four Thousand Four Hundred and Thirty One only) respectively which was accepted by the Department. Later on it came to the notice of the appellant that Anti-Dumping Duty Notification even though dated 29.03.2016 was not published in the Official Gazette of India on 29.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in the present appeal viz. the effective date of Notification and secondly whether refund can be claimed without challenging the assessment in cases of self-assessment. As far as first issue is concerned he submitted that as per Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1962 the date for determination of rate of duty and tariff valuation of the imported goods is the date on which a Bill of Entry is presented and in the present case the Bill of Entry was filed on 29.03.2016 hence the date for determination of the duty is 29.03.2016. He further submitted that the Notification No. 29/2016 Cus. ADD 29.03.2016 was published in the official Gazette on 02.04.2016 at 9 a.m as per the reply received by him on RTI application from the Department of Publication ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s relied upon by both the authorities and the Circular were during the pre-amendment period where the assessment was done by the Departmental Officer, but after the amendment Bill of Entry is being self assessed by the importer and the proper officer is only verifying such self assessment. He further submitted that the importer who has made self assessment cannot file an appeal against his own self assessment. He further submitted that this issue is no more res integra and has been settled by various decisions of the Tribunal and the High Court. For this submission he relied upon the following decisions: a. Zenith Computers Vs. CC, Goa - 2017 (358) E.L.T. 1125 (Tri.-Mum.) b. Liebherr India Vs. Com. Of Cus. Kolkata - 2017 (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter on he realized that he was not liable to pay the ADD because the Notification imposing the Anti-Dumping duty though dated 29.03.2016 when the Bill of Entry were filed but in fact this Notification was published in the Gazette of the Government of India only on 02.04.2016 which means that on the date of import of the goods this Notification was not in force and therefore he has wrongly paid the Anti-Dumping Duty and subsequently filed the refund claim which was rejected on the ground that Anti-Dumping duty Notification was in force on 29.03.2016 and consequently refund was denied on the ground that the appellant has not challenged the assessment made in the Bill of Entry. Further I find that as far as first issue regarding the effective ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rein the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has considered the amendment made in Section 27 and also distinguished the decisions of the Supreme Court in the case of Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Priya Blue Industries Ltd. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Micromax Informatics Ltd. in Paras 13, 14 and 15 has held as under: "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 ....