9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 1532 - AT - CustomsRefund of Customs Duty paid in excess - denial of refund on the ground that the assessment had become final there being no challenge to such assessment - Held that - There is no dispute as to the fact that filing of the shipping bill discharge of the customs duty appellant herein and also question of considering the FOB as cum duty value. On an identical issue in the case of Sameera Trading Company 2010 (5) TMI 518 - CESTAT BANGALORE it was held that The excess duty claimed by the respondents considering the FOB price as cum-duty price is in accordance with law and the original authority should have allowed the refund Refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues Involved:
1. Rejection of refund claim by the appellant. 2. Finality of customs duty assessment. 3. Application of Board Circulars and legal precedents. 4. Correctness of duty calculation based on FOB value. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Rejection of Refund Claim: The appellant filed a shipping bill for export on 20.09.2008, discharging the applicable customs duty on 24.09.2008 based on the FOB value. Subsequently, the appellant sought a refund of the excess customs duty paid, relying on a Board Circular dated 10.11.2008, which clarified that till 31.12.2008, export duty discharged on FOB value should be considered as cum-tax FOB. Both the Adjudicating Authority and the First Appellate Authority rejected the refund claim, citing the finality of the assessment and referencing the Apex Court's decisions in Priya Blue and Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. 2. Finality of Customs Duty Assessment: The authorities rejected the refund claim on the grounds that the customs duty assessment had become final and was not challenged. The Departmental Representative supported this stance, referencing another Board Circular No. 24/2004-Cus dated 18.03.2004, which emphasized the applicability of the Apex Court's decision in Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. to customs cases, asserting that without challenging the assessment, the refund claim was correctly rejected. 3. Application of Board Circulars and Legal Precedents: The appellant's counsel argued that an identical issue was decided in favor of the appellants in the case of Sameera Trading Company, which was affirmed by the Apex Court in Commissioner Vs. Muneer Enterprises. Several other case laws were cited to support the appellant's position. The Tribunal in Sameera Trading Company had ruled that the original authority wrongly assessed the export duty by taking the FOB value as the transaction value, contrary to the CBEC Circular dated 10.11.2008, which stated that the FOB value should be considered as cum-duty price. This error was correctable under Section 154 of the Customs Act. 4. Correctness of Duty Calculation Based on FOB Value: The Tribunal found that the assessing officer had erred in computing the export duty by considering the FOB value as the transaction value. The Tribunal emphasized that it was the duty of the assessing officer to correctly quantify the duty liability. The error in assessment was correctable under Section 154 of the Customs Act, which allows for the correction of clerical or arithmetical mistakes or errors arising from accidental slips or omissions. Conclusion: The Tribunal concluded that the impugned order rejecting the refund claim was unsustainable. It held that the original authority should have allowed the refund, considering the FOB value as cum-duty price, as clarified by the CBEC Circular and supported by various judicial precedents. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal with consequential reliefs. Order: The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside with consequential reliefs, if any. The Tribunal's decision was pronounced and dictated in open court.
|
