2009 (6) TMI 753

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... [Order]. This appeal filed by the assessees is against the rejection of a refund claim. The original authority and the first appellate authority rejected the claim as not maintainable on the ground that the assessment on the basis of which countervailing duty was paid on the goods re-imported by the assessee was not challenged. It has been held that the assessment of the relevant Bill of Ent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rding to the appellant, the assessing authority ought to have passed a speaking order under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act, 1962. In this connection, it is pointed out that the assessee had claimed exemption from payment of countervailing duty in the relevant Bill of Entry and therefore a speaking order should have been passed after considering the assessee s claim for exemption. This ground of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... g order within 15 days from the date of assessment of the Bill of Entry, under Section 17(5) of the Customs Act. It appears, this was not done. In the circumstances, according to the appellant, the Supreme Court s ruling in Priya Blue Industries (supra) would not be applicable to the present case. I find that this plea was not raised before the lower authorities, who chose to reject the refund cla .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X