2008 (2) TMI 403 - HC - Customs

Non-Challenge of Bill of Entry / Assessment Refund of duty paid without claiming rebate for which importer entitled to - the appellant filed the bill of entry and allowed the proper officer to assess the same on the value stated in the invoice and declared in the Bill of Entry. After three or four months, the appellant approached the appellate authority stating that he was entitled to certain reductions by way of quality discount and dispatch earnings, which has not been considered by the proper officer. The claim was rejected on the ground that the bill of entry has been assessed finally and the appellant has not demurred anything about the assessment and claimed any deduction but accepted the assessment and cleared the goods and the Tribunal has also doubted the credibility of the document. Held that refund is not allowable.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against assessment order for clearance of imported goods.
2. Claim for deductions of quantity discount, quality discount, and dispatch earnings.
3. Applicability of rebate entitlement despite not being claimed by the appellant.
4. Reliability of the memorandum of understanding as evidence for deductions.
5. Finality of assessment and acceptance of duty payment without protest.

Analysis:
1. The appellant filed a bill of entry for clearance of imported "Rock Phosphate" at a declared value accepted by the Customs officer. Subsequently, the appellant claimed deductions for quantity discount, quality discount, and dispatch earnings, seeking a refund of duty paid. The appellate authority and the Tribunal rejected the claim citing failure to seek provisional assessment or file a refund claim initially.

2. The appellant argued for the entitlement to deductions regardless of prior claim submission. The Tribunal noted that the memorandum of understanding, which supported the deductions, was not presented to the proper officer during assessment. The Tribunal scrutinized a xerox copy of the memorandum, highlighting discrepancies and lack of authentication, leading to the rejection of its reliability as evidence for deductions.

3. The Tribunal emphasized that the invoice value declared in the bill of entry did not include any permissible discounts or rebates, and no deduction claims were made during assessment. The appellant's acceptance of the assessment and duty payment without protest further solidified the Tribunal's decision to dismiss the appeal against the final assessment order.

4. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant's delayed claim for deductions, lack of credible evidence, and acceptance of the initial assessment without objection did not warrant interference. Consequently, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was dismissed, with no costs awarded. The connected Miscellaneous Petition was also dismissed in line with the main appeal judgment.