9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n passed on by the respondent - - - 73/2011-Cus - Dated:- 5-4-2011 - Shri D.P. Singh, J. REPRESENTED BY : Shri S.P. Chhabria, Dy. Commissioner, for the Department. Shri Kailash Didwania, for the Assessee. [Order]. This revision application has been filed by the applicant Commissioner of Customs (General), New Custom House, Mumbai against the order-in-appeal No. 58/2009/MCD/AC/(MCD)/08-09, dated 2-3-2009 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Mumbai with respect to Order-in-Original No. S/8-10-02/2000 MCD, dated 17-9-2008 passed by Assistant Commissioner of Customs, MCD, New Custom House, Mumbai. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the Respondent M/s. Kavi Commercial Company Ltd., Mumbai filed a refund claim of Rs. 1,3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said consignment. It is quiet possible that the burden of duty could have been passed on in the sales of the other items imported and subsequently sold. 3.2 Chartered Accountant Certificate, without any supporting documents is not sufficient to prove that burden of duty has not been passed on to the consumer. Chartered Engineer Certificate is not supported by relevant sales bills or documents relating to placing of order and terms of supply. Appellate authority has erred by taking into consideration only the Balance Sheet as the basis of proving unjust enrichment aspect and has failed to take into account any other aspects like sales bills, documents relating to placing of order etc. 3.3 The applicant placed reliance of following judge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ivables) for the period 1-4-1999 to 31-3-2000 and from 1-4-2007 to 31-3-2008, which proves that the amount claimed is shown by them as Receivables till date in the Balance Sheet. 4.3 The custom duty Rs. 1,32,672/- on short landed goods, paid by the respondents has not been included in the cost of the material by the company and debited the same into the account of Custom duty refund receivables in their book of account. 5. Personal Hearing held on 21-12-2010, was attended by Shri S.P. Chhabria, Deputy Commissioner on behalf of applicant and by Shri Kailash Didwania on behalf of the Respondent. The applicants sought 21 days time to submit reply to the contention of applicants made during Personal Hearing, however, no such reply recei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to 31-3-2008, where in the claimed refund amount is shown as Customs Duty Receivables . Further, the respondent have submitted C.A. Certificate dated 4-4-2002, which certifies that no Modvat/proforma credit is taken by the Respondent against the short landed quantity and no realization is received to them against the same. Government also notes that the C.A. Certificate dated 14-2-2009 certifies that the burden of Custom duty paid on short landed goods for Rs. 1,32,672/- has not been passed on by the Respondent. Further the Balance Sheet submitted by the respondents showns the claimed amount as outstanding towards customs Government notes that the respondent has stated that they were never specifically asked to produce documents like sales ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
