9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 255X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... td., Kandla filed refund claim of Rs.3,10,647/- being the duty paid in excess at the time of clearance of cosmetics, perfumes etc. The original adjudicating authority rejected the refund claim on the ground that the appellants have not challenged the assessment but only filed the refund claim against the Order-in-Original. The appellant went to the Commissioner (Appeals) who also rejected the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00) ELT 296 (Tri. Bang.)] 7. CCE Nahavaseva Vs. Crest Chemicals [2009 (244) ELT 361(Tri. Mumbai)] 8. Hero Cycles Ltd. Vs. Union of India [2009 (240) ELT 490 (Bom.)] 2. I have carefully considered these judgments and orders cited by both the Revenue as well as the appellants. The latest judgment of Hon ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Aman Medical Products Ltd. Vs. CC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of duty merely after filing a Bill of Entry. In fact, such a case is the present case in which there is no assessment order for being challenged in the appeal which is passed under Section 27(1)(i) of the Act because there is no contest or lis and hence no adversarial assessment order. 5.?The Tribunal has referred to the cases of CCE, Kanpur v. Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. [2000 (120) E.L.T. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... holding that the refund claim of the appellant was maintainable under Section 27 of the Customs Act and the non-filing of the appeal against the assessed bill of entry does not deprive the appellant to file its claim for refund under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 and which claim will fall under clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of Section 27. 3. To my mind the observations of the Hon bl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
