TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (11) TMI 177
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9027.10 with the benefit of Notfn. No. 60/95-Cus. at 25% basic duty and 10% countervailing duty instead of 50% basic and 20% countervailing duty as it was assessed. 2. The assessments made on the bill of entry were held to be final, since no appeal was filed against such assessments. Therefore subsequent claim of refund was rejected for lack of jurisdiction by the Asst. Commissioner. 3. The Commissioner (Appeals) while disposing of the appeal and rejecting the refund held that as the appellants neither applied to the initial assessments authority for re-assessments nor filed any appeal against the initial assessments of the bill of entry which is an appealable order and the duty were not paid under protest. Therefore the refund was ri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Commissioner of Customs - (a) in the case of any import made by any individual for his personal use or by Govt. job by any educational, research or charitable institution or hospital, before the expiry of one year; (b) in any other case, before the expiry of six months, from the date of payment of duty and interest, if any paid on such duty........" A Statutory right has been conferred upon the assessee to file Refund Application if he is claiming refund on any duty paid by him in pursuance of an Order of Assessment on a BE Section 27(1) thus statutorily provides for filing the Refund Claim in the following situation — (i) There is an existence an Order of Assessment. (ii) Duty has been paid by the assessee of such Orde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of "an Order of Assessment", it obviously means that an Order of Assessment is in existence and that the duty in question was paid in pursuance of such Order of Assessment. (b) A full Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Karnataka Power Corpn. Ltd. v. CC (Appeals) - 2002 (143) E.L.T. 482 has held in that case wherein the assessee :- "... had imported Epoxy Coils and filed Bills of Entry which were assessed under sub-heading No. 8544.11. No appeal was filed against the orders of assessment on the Bills of Entry and the Customs Duties so assessed were paid. Thereafter, the assessee filed an application for reassessment and refund a part of the duty on the ground that the correct classification should have been under sub-headi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... V.P. Latex. This, according to Mr. Sanghi, clearly shows how the appellants themselves have understood the matter. There is, however, no estoppel in law against a party in a taxation matter. In order to clear the goods for the customs, the appellants Agents may have given the classification in accordance with the wishes of the authorities or they may even be under some misapprehension. But when law allows them the right to ask for refund on a proper appraisement and which they actually applied for, we do not attach any significance to this aspect of the matter pointed out by the counsel. The question is of general importance and must be decided on its merits." The said position of law has been accepted by the C.B.E.C. in CBEC's Customs ....