9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ification in the field and no dispute on the same – refund allowed - C/1078/2006 - A/1624/2011-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 27-4-2011 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Dr. P. Babu, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri J.C. Patel, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri R.S. Sangia, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : Archana Wadhwa, Member (J) (for the Bench) (Oral)]. - This is an appeal filed by M/s. Ashwin Vanaspati Industries Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara against Order-in-Appeal No. 324/2005(324-KDL) Cus/Commr (A)/Ahd, dated 25-8-2005, Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Ahmedabad. The appellants filed two refund claims, one for refund of Rs. 47,92,224/- (Rupees Forty Seven Lakhs, Ninety Two Thousands, Two Hundreds and Twenty Four Only) and second for Rs. 10,64,736/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal filed before us, the appellant s main contention has been that the Order-in-Appeal has been drawn on the strength of the decision of Hon ble Apex Court of India in the case of Priya Blue Industries Ltd. v. C.C. - 2004 (172) E.L.T. 145 (S.C.). The Hon ble Court maintained that once Bill of Entry has been assessed and if the importer decides to claim refund of excess duty of Customs paid by him, he has to take the assessment of Bill of Entry as an appealable order and challenge the same. 3. He further submits that said order of the Hon ble Supreme Court was considered by Delhi High Court in their latest decision in the case of Aman Medical Products Ltd. v. C.C., Delhi as reported in 2010 (250) E.L.T. 30 (Del.) and the same stands di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s were paid by adopting the higher tariff value of US $ 337 and higher rate of duty 75%. Subsequently the tariff value was reduced from US $ 337 to US $ 286 vide Notification No. 52/2001 dated 9-10-2001 and the tariff rate vas reduced from 75% to 65% vide Notification No. 111/2001-Cus. dated 30-10-2001. Inasmuch as the oil was cleared by the appellants during the month of November and December, 2001, the reduced tariff value was required to be adopted and reduced rate of duty was required to be applied in terms of the provisions of Section 15(i)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. In terms of the said rule, the rate of duty and tariff valuation, if any, applicable to any imported goods shall be rate and valuation in force on the date on which the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the field and was not available. As such, we really fail to understand what was required to be appealed against by the appellants when there was no notification in the field and no dispute on the same. The law declared by the Hon ble High Court is required to be applied to the facts of the present case. Inasmuch as the present case there was no order of assessment or any dispute of applicability of notification or otherwise, we are of the view that subsequent decision of the Hon ble Delhi High Court is applicable to the instant case. We accordingly, held in favour of the appellants and allow the appeal by setting aside the impugned order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and restoring the order of the original adjudicating authority. (Pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
