2015 (12) TMI 922 - AT - Customs

Denial of refund claim - Commissioner remanded matter for de novo adjudication - Held that - Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the matter to decide afresh after considering his observations as well as the submissions of the appellant. Hence, I do not find any reason to interfere in the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the appellant is rejected. - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claim rejection of Special Additional Duty, remand for denovo adjudication, Tribunal's decision coverage, factual dispute consideration, appeal rejection, consideration of submissions in paper book for de-novo adjudication.

Refund Claim Rejection of Special Additional Duty:
The adjudicating authority initially rejected the refund claim of Rs. 1,19,851.00 related to Special Additional Duty. The Commissioner (Appeals) remanded the matter for denovo adjudication, instructing to consider the observations made in the order and to pass a suitable speaking order following the principles of natural justice within three months.

Remand for Denovo Adjudication:
The Commissioner (Appeals) directed a fresh consideration of the case after taking into account his observations and the submissions of the appellant. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the remand order, leading to the rejection of the appellant's appeal.

Tribunal's Decision Coverage:
The appellant's representative cited a Tribunal decision in their favor and submitted a Paper Book supporting their case. The Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to consider the submissions in the paper book during the de-novo adjudication process, ensuring compliance with the law.

Factual Dispute Consideration:
The Authorized Representative for the Revenue highlighted a factual dispute that would be assessed by the Adjudicating authority during the remand proceedings, indicating a need for a thorough examination of the facts before reaching a decision.

In conclusion, the judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT AHMEDABAD involved the rejection of a refund claim for Special Additional Duty, a remand for denovo adjudication based on the Commissioner (Appeals) instructions, consideration of a Tribunal decision and a factual dispute, leading to the rejection of the appellant's appeal. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a fresh assessment considering all submissions, including those in the paper book, to ensure a fair and just outcome in accordance with the law.