2023 (9) TMI 1265

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5 MM" (hereinafter to be referred as impugned goods') vide Bill of Entry No. 9422155 dated 26.12.2018 from China. The goods were examined by the Customs and as per Customs examination order dated 10.01.2019, the Anti-Dumping Duty was leviable on impugned goods in terms of Notification No. 47/2015-ADD dated 08.09.2015, however, to satisfy the contention of the appellant, representative samples were ordered to be drawn for getting the same tested for seeking report as to whether the sample is processed glass meant for decorative/industrial/automotive purposes or not. • Accordingly, sample was collected & sent to CSIR-Kolkata vide letter C No 307/CONCOR/19 dated 11.01.2019. The CSIR-Kolkata vide Ref No. GC/TCC/TR-3140/19- 20 d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed that the appellant got the copy of the order on 31.01.2020 and filed appeal before the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) on 20.03.2020 which is within the stipulated period of 60 days from the receipt of such order but the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) has wrongly counted the period from the date of report of the CSIR dated 11.09.2019. • Ld. Consultant further submitted that the time limitation as proscribed under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962 is not applicable in the instant case as this is a case of amount collected without authority of law which is against the tenents of Article 265 of the Constitution of India. For this submission, he relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI vs. ITC Limited 1....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ubmissions of both the parties and perusal of material on record, I find that in the present case, the appellant imported "Euro Grey Float Glass 3300X2140 MM 5 MM" from China and filed Bill of Entry No. 9422155 dated 26.12.2018 for home consumption. But the department was of the view that the goods attract Anti Dumping Duty and directed the appellant to deposit the Anti Dumping Duty and thereafter, sent the sample for analysis and after the Report of the Laboratory came, it was found that the impugned goods do not attract Anti Dumping Duty. Thereafter, the appellant filed refund claim before the Assistant Commissioner who vide his order rejected the refund claim and the order of rejecting the said refund claim was received by the appellant ....