2024 (3) TMI 603

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....amended. The Original Authority sanctioned part of the refund-claim and rejected the amount of Rs.2,18,490/- and Rs.2,32,950/- observing that the appellant has not produced documents to establish that the SAD has not been passed on to another. Aggrieved by such order, the appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who upheld the view taken by the Original Authority. Hence, these appeals. 2.1 The Ld. counsel Ms. Shrayashree appeared and argued for the appellant. It is submitted that in respect of refund-claim for both the disputed periods, the appellant had furnished the Chartered Accountant Certificate co-relating the payment of Sales Tax / Value Added Tax on the imported goods for which the refund was claimed. However, Def....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t to have been rejected in regard to the few Bills of Entry stating that the appellant has not established the issue of unjust enrichment. 2.3 The Ld. counsel submitted that the rejection of refund-claim has been made in regard to goods which have been imported by the appellant declaring the MRP of the goods. The refund-claim has been sanctioned in respect of goods imported declaring the transaction value. The Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the appellant has not proved whether the MRP declared by them includes the SAD or not. It is submitted by the Ld. counsel that the appellant has paid SAD on the MRP declared by them and therefore there is no question of including the SAD in the MRP of the goods imported. The observations by ....