2019 (6) TMI 111

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... No.24/2015. Subsequent to clearance of the goods, respondents filed appeals to the Commissioner (Appeals) contending that they are entitled to benefit of 1% CVD under Sl. No.263A (amended), which they had omitted claim at import stage. Appellants, therefore, prayed for setting aside the assessment in the concerned bills of entry and for extending benefit of said Notification No.12/2012-CE (as emended). Lower appellate authority vide impugned order dated 27.08.2015 directed the original authority to recall and reassess the bill of entries with concessional rate of duty after analyzing the applicability of relevant judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of M/s. SRF Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Customs, Chennai reported in 2015 (318) E.L.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 1999 (108) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.) and held as under:- "The ratio of the aforesaid judgment in "15. Thermax Private Limited (supra) was relied upon by this Court in Hyderabad Industries Ltd. (supra) while interpreting Section 3(1) of the Tariff Act itself; albeit in somewhat different context. However, the manner in which the issue was dealt with lends support to the case of the assessee herein. In that case, the Court noted that Section 3(1) of the Tariff Act provides for levy of an additional duty. The duty is, in other words, in addition to the Customs duty leviable under Section 12 of the Customs Act read with Section 2 of the Tariff Act. The explanation to Section 3 has two limbs. The first limb clarifies that the duty chargeable u....