9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed a refund claim of Rs. 2,72,160/- on 9-1-98 under Section 21 22 of the Customs Act, 1962 on the ground that while shifting the container, three coils fell down and got damaged. They also submitted a photocopy of survey report issued by M/s. Metcalfe and Hodgkinson (Pvt.) Ltd. The Asstt. Commissioner of Customs, ICD, Tughlakabad vide his Order, dated 13/25-7-98 rejected the refund claim on the ground that the basis for calculating the refund amount has not been explained. It is observed that the importer had paid the duty and they had stated that at the time of taking the delivery, three coils were got damaged. However, no joint survey with customs authorities was conducted. It is further observed that after the survey, they filed a refu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Section 22, as damage should not be due to negligence of the owner or his agent. He has observed that the abatement of duty is not available, as the appellants themselves accept that there had been negligence on the part of their agents in lifting the container without locking the door due to which the coils got damaged. 3. The present appeal is against the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Shri Bipin Garg, Advocate appearing as proxy for Shri Anurag Rishi, Advocate for the appellants requests for an adjournment, since it is contended that the ld. Advocate for the appellants is not feeling well. It is however, observed from the record that this matter has been adjourned at least thrice earlier at the request of the ld. Advoc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Assistant Commissioner of Customs - (b) that any imported goods, other than warehoused goods, had been damaged at any time after the unloading thereof in India but before their examination under section 17, on account of any accident not due to any wilful act, negligence or default of the importer, his employee or agent; Such goods should be chargeable to duty in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (2). 5. Since in this case, the goods had already been assessed to duty and the clearance allowed by the customs authorities on payment of duty thereof, no abatement is available on the damaged goods under these provisions. There are no other provisions cited by the appellants for claiming the abatement which may be examined ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
