9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 861X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent : Shri Sushant Murthy, Adv. JUDGEMENT Per: P R Chandrasekharan: Revenue is in appeal against Order-in-Appeal No: 228/2009/MCH/AC/Export/2009 dated 25/08/2009 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Mumbai - I. 2. Vide the impugned order the learned lower appellate authority held that Notification No. 77/2008 dated 13/06/2008 is effective from the midnight of 13/06/2008 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Export Order' was passed on 18/06/2008, refund was sanctioned by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs and only in respect of two refund claims, pertaining to shipping bills 5477846 and 5477736 filed on 06/08/2008 and 05/06/2008, wherein the 'Let Export Order' was given on 13/06/2008, refund was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner on the only ground that Notification 77/2008 dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... venue hadsuo motu sanctioned refund without taking the ground that the original assessment had not been challenged. The only ground taken in the Assistant Commissioner's order for refusing the refund in respect of two shipping bills was Notification 77/2008 dated 13/06/2008 is effective from the midnight of 13/06/2008. It is a settled position in law that a Notification issued on a particular ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arty would be entitled for the refund whereas in respect of two shipping bills only, the question of non-challenging of assessment order arise. In any case, this was not the ground on which refund claim had been rejected. Revenue has not challenged the sanction of six refund claims by the original refund sanctioning authority. Therefore, they cannot be found to entertain a different ground for rej ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
