2025 (7) TMI 1149

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ndent ORDER Brief facts of the case are that the Appellant had imported Glazing Lines, Rectification Lines and Grinding Media from suppliers inItaly and Barcelona in 2005 under Project Import Scheme under Chapter 98.01 to the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 read with Sl.No.441 to Notification No.21/2005-Cus/ dated 01.03.2007. The Appellant had filed Bills of Entry and the goods we....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ourt by its order dated 09.06.2009 in W.P. No.7151/2009 directed the Commissioner (Appeals) to dispose the appeal on merits in accordance with law within a period of 4 weeks from the date of receipt of the order. 3. Pursuant to the above direction of Hon'ble High Court, the First Appellate Authority passed the Order-in-Appeal No.629/2009 dated 13.07.2009 setting aside the above Order-in-Original ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ting Authority thereafter passed Order-in-Original No.17948/2011 dated 16.11.2011 sanctioning the Refund of excess duty paid; claim held to be made in time. This order was challenged by Revenue before Commissioner (Appeals) and the First Appellate Authority vide impugned Order-in-Appeal C.Cus.No.690/2014 dated 22.04.2014 allowed the appeal filed by Department. The First Appellate Authority has set....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... nature of giving effect/consequential order while the speaking order is the OIO dated 15.12.2010. The department did not challenge the OIA dt. 13.07.2009 and nor did it challenge above OIO dt 15.12.2010 and therefore, the setting aside of an effectively consequential/giving effect order cannot shake the very foundation laid-down vide a speaking OIO. In this Order-in-Original is there a finding as....