2009 (1) TMI 229

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... following substantial questions of law for determination by this Court:- "(i) Whether the market price determined by surveyor is cum-duty? (ii) Whether the appellant is entitled to interest on the delayed refund of duty? (iii) Whether the Tribunal has passed the impugned order in violation of principle of natural justice?" 2. Brief facts of the present case are that the appellant imported a variable induction furnace equipment vide bill of entry dated 22-1-1979. The goods were kept in a warehouse and ex-bond bilk of entry was filed on 10-4-1982. On 15-4-1982, it was found by the appellant that the imported goods were in damaged condition. Accordingly, request was made to the surveyor for conducting survey for claiming abatement....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e order dated 15-12-1997, the Tribunal directed the Assistant Commissioner to refund the amount of duty claimed by the appellant taking into account the value of the damaged goods as assessed by the Surveyor (P-6). Accordingly, a refund of Rs. 3,16,777/- has been allowed instead of Rs. 4,71,120/- along with interest as claimed by the appellant. 6. Again appeal was filed by the appellant and the Appellate Authority-cum-Commissioner (Appeals) came to the conclusion that it was a case of delay in refund and the appellant was entitled to interest. The Appellate Authority, thus, directed the Assistant Commissioner to decide the issue whether the value assessed by the Surveyor includes customs duty or not, vide his order dated 28-3-2000 (P-7).....