9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant 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 - Following decision of AMAN MEDICAL PRODUCTS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, DELHI [20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... well as Additional Customs Duty. The exemption is available in terms of Notification No. 20/2006-Cus., dated 1-3-2006. The refund claims have been rejected on the ground that the assessments were not challenged and without challenging the assessment, the refund claims could not have been filed. 2. Ld. Advocate submits that the decisions rendered taking a view that without challenging the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 20/2006-Cus. is a conditional notification and the appellant had agreed to file written submissions within a week of personal hearing which they did not file. Since Notification No. 20/2006-Cus. is a conditional notification, it can be said that there was a dispute between the Department and the assessee and therefore the decision in the case of Priya Blue Industries - 2004 (172) E.L.T. 145 (S.C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said notification? Obviously, in the present case, there is negligence on the part of the assessing officer. We cannot say that the assessing officer applied his mind to the facts and consciously took a decision to levy Additional Duty. This is a case of sheer omission on the part of the assessing officer. 4. Therefore, this ground taken by the Commissioner in the impugned order is not corre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
