9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hallenged. Assessment on second check basis in all three bills of entry and duty paid based on declared quantity. Shortage detected only during examination of goods prior to clearance while duty paid based on declared quantity. Held that- High Court in appellant’s own case held in similar situation that assessment not required to be challenged. Impugned order rejecting refund not sustainable. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 214/- (Rupees Fifty Four Thousand Two Hundred Forteen) and Rs. 12,732/- (Rupees Twelve Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty Two). The Assistant Commissioner rejected the refund claims on the ground that in terms of Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Priya Blue Industries Ltd. v. CC (Preventive) reported in 2004 (172) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.), the appellant should have first challenged the assessment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before filing the refund claim and that in this regard, he relies upon Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court's judgment in the case of Bansal Alloys & Metals Pvt. Ltd. v. CC, Amritsar reported in 2009 (240) E.L.T. 483 (P & H), wherein in the appellant's own case, in an identical circumstances, the Hon'ble High Court has held that the appellant, were not required to challenge the assessment order, be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the bills of entry. The shortage was detected only at the time of examination of the goods prior to clearance while duty had already been paid on the basis of the declared quantity. I find that in an identical circumstances in appellant's own case, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that for filing the refund claim, the assessment of duty was not required to be challenged. In view of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
