9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 1474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... porter, while issuing the invoice for sale of the said goods, shall specifically indicate in the invoice that in respect of the goods covered therein, no credit of the additional duty of customs levied under sub-section (5) of section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 shall be admissible; 2. While 9 appeals were disposed by ld. Appellate Authority by common Order-in-Appeal No. CCA/I & G/102-110/2010, dated 26-7-2010 the other appeal was disposed by different order dated 24-3-2011. However all the appeals before ld. Commissioner (Appeals) resulted with dismissal denying refund of additional customs duty. 3.1 Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that different amounts of refund are involved in all the 10 appeals while the issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustoms Notification No. 102/2007, dated 14-9-2007. The Notification No. 296/2010-Cus., dated 27-2-2010 stated that additional duty on import was refundable which are packed and governed by above special law irrespective of falling of such goods under any of the Chapters of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. 3.4 It was further submitted that the appellant cannot be deprived of the refund when all the documents were furnished before ld. Adjudicating Authority and notification dated 27-2-2010 warranted liberal interpretation in view of compliance available at page 46 of the appeal folder supporting the refund application. But those were ignored. The appellant gets support for its contention from the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Equ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of refund to the appellant was justified. 5. Heard both sides and perused the record. 6.1 Since entire dispute is narrowed down to the issue of compliance to the condition under para 2(b) of Notification No. 102/2007, dated 14-9-2007, it would be sufficient if it is held that declaration on the invoices issued was mandatory and the trader appellant was not immune from compliance to the said mandatory requirement of the notification. There is nothing in the notification to discriminate a manufacturer from a trader when the importer of the goods claiming refund has an obligation under law to be declare on the invoice itself that the goods sold under that invoice shall not enjoy credit of additional duty of customs levied under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... benefit granted by a Notification operates from the date that is notified and that does not intend the benefit to flow at public cost retrospectively. Therefore grant of the Notification in question cannot be construed to be retrospective in nature. Accordingly the appellant fails to succeed on the plea of lateral notification operating retrospectively. Accordingly appellant fails gain from the Judgment of Apex Court in Malwas Industries case (supra). 7. We have perused the decision cited in Equinox's case (supra). We are not satisfied that the commercial invoice need not carry declaration. As the issue involved in this case is not unjust enrichment, the other citations relied by appellant is not profitable. When the law is well clear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
