9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 513X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly covers the issue in favour of the assesses. Refund of Deposit - Right of appeal - Held that: The amount deposited by the assessee to exercise his right of appeal is as per the statutory requirement, and in this case appellant has paid the amount of redemption fine and penalty as ordered by Adjudicating Authority, “under protest”. - Refund to be allowed - C/1055-1056/2010 - 1269-1270/2010 - Dated:- 7-9-2010 - Shri M.V. Ravindran, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri P.A. Augustin, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri K.S. Chandrasekhar, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - These two appeals are filed against the Orders-in-appeal No. 03/10 and No. 05/10 both dated 22-2-2010. Since the issues involved in both these appeals are identi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hey were not required in a case of consequential relief. He would rely upon the judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Narayan Nambiar Meloths v. CC [2010 (251) E.L.T. 57 (Ker.)]. It is his submission that the judgment squarely covers the issue in favour of the assesses. 4. Ld. DR on the other hand would reiterate that the requirement of original documents is a must for ascertaining that the mount to be refunded is correctly quantified or not. It is his submission that the CBEC s Circular F.No. 275/37/2K-CX.8A dt. 2-1-2002 will only applicable in the case of pre-deposit as ordered by the High Court. It is his submission that the deposits are demands as adjudged by the Adjudicating Authority and it cannot be considered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ld. counsel that the judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Kerala in the case of Narayan Nambiar Meloth (supra) will cover the issue in favour of the assessees. Respectfully, I reproduce the entire judgment, which is under :- [Judgment]. - Prayer in this writ petition is to direct the respondent to process the refund application submitted by the petitioner and refund the amount that is due to him. 2. Facts of the case are that the petitioner had imported a Toyota Land Cruiser Prado car. In respect of aforesaid vehicle, proceedings under the Customs Act were initiated and an adjudication order was passed and the petitioner was called upon to pay duty, fine and penalty. He paid the amount due and the vehicle was also released. Subseq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... letter from the person who made the deposit, requesting for return of the amount, along with the appellate order and attested Xerox copy of the Challan in form TR 6 would suffice for processing the refund application. From what is stated above, it is evident that in this case, the petitioner has fully complied with the aforesaid requirement laid down in this clarification. 7. In view of the above reasons, the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent to process the refund application made by the petitioner, and allow refund of the amount due to him, in implementation of Exhibit P3, the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Orders as above shall be passed as expeditiously as possible and at any rate, within four weeks of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
