2007 (7) TMI 695 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues involved: Rejection of a refund claim based on classification of goods under specific headings u/s Customs Tariff Act and Central Excise Tariff Act.

Issue 1: Classification of goods and refund claim

The appeal was filed against the rejection of a refund claim by the assessee. The goods in question, 'epoxy insulated coils' along with accessories, were initially cleared under specific headings of the Customs Tariff Act and the Central Excise Tariff Act. The assessee sought re-assessment of the goods under a different heading for the purpose of claiming a refund of excess duty paid. The Asst. Commissioner rejected this claim, confirming the original classification of the goods under a particular heading. The appellate authority also upheld this decision, leading to the current appeal challenging the appellate Commissioner's order.

Issue 2: Challenge through refund claim

The records indicate that the assessment of the goods was not legally challenged by the assessee. Instead of appealing the assessment order, the assessee opted to challenge it through a refund claim, disputing the classification of the goods and seeking a refund based on a different heading. The appellants argued for the classification of the goods under a specific heading and claimed the benefit of a Customs Notification. However, the ld. SDR contended that such grounds should have been raised in an appeal against the assessment order, not in a refund claim without challenging the assessment. Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the ld. SDR emphasized that a refund claim contrary to the assessment order was not maintainable u/s Customs Act. As the appellants voluntarily cleared the goods under a specific heading and did not appeal the assessment order, challenging it through a refund claim was deemed impermissible in law. Consequently, the refund claim was deemed inadmissible based on the legal precedent cited by the ld. SDR.

In conclusion, the appeal was dismissed due to the impermissible nature of challenging the assessment through a refund claim without following the appropriate legal procedures for appeal.