9911796707
TMI Blog1980 (3) TMI 181X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst the order of Assistant Collector of Customs, Refund Section bearing his Order No. S/6-C-2254/79R. This is a very peculiar type of appeal. Normally the Department Supervisory Authorities try to bring home to the Appellate Authorities to avoid making orders of remand. It is no doubt a very salutary principle that orders of remand should be avoided. After all that never helps anybody neither the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd on account of it they are unable to place it before the Assistant Collector. The Assistant Collector in this case has beyond doubt rejected the claim as unsubstantiated and the only reason which he gives for such rejection is that the triplicate copy of the Bill of Entry or the Duty Bill as we call it has not been produced by appellants in spite of having been called upon to do so. The same exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f it a meaningless thing. How could he quote all these details and say in the same breath that the appellants had not given him the cash number and date, thus disabling him from tracing the original Bill of Entry? Not only that, I notice further that the Assistant Collector very well knew the exact nature of the claim or grounds thereof. He summarises that in the opening paragraph of his order. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aim or to reject it as unsubstantiated. Disposal of claims with such obviously meaningless reasoning does give a short term satisfaction of having got rid of a file and having achieved a numerical disposal of pending refund claims on hand. But obviously if only the Assistant Collector reads his order carefully, it should be obvious to him that he is contradicting himself by his narration. Unless h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
