9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of TR 6 challan and also deposit has been recorded in demand order, refund claim should not have been rejected – When payment as per adjudication order is known to assessing authority, refund as per appellate order is duty of assessing authority – Assessing authority cannot retain amount and deprive assessee of use of his money unreasonably – Impugned order rejecting claim for refund set aside – Decided in favour of Assesse. - C/450-451/2012-Mum - Final Order Nos. A/1483-1484/2014-WZB/C-IV(SMB) - Dated:- 14-11-2014 - Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (J) Ms. Sparsh Prasad, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri D.D. Joshi, Asst. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER These are two appeals directed against Order-in-Appeal No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. India Steel International and vide order 309/YSR/ AC/REFUND(Exp)-Gr. VII-C dated 12-5-2009 in respect of M/s. ISI Bars Ltd. The appellant aggrieved of the aforesaid rejection orders, filed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals), who upheld the original rejection order of refund passed by the Asst. Commissioner of Customs. Therefore the appellants are before me. 2. Ms. Sparsh Prasad, ld. Counsel for the appellants submits that there is no dispute that these amounts for which the refund is sought for was paid over and above, the adjudged amount as per adjudication order No. S/16/MISC/ 463/95 Gr. VII/DC/BEL/ISI/95, dated 7-5-1997, therefore the said amount was apparently refundable to the appellant; the refund was merely rejected on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. Prasad relied on Kerala High Court judgment in the CC, Cochin v. Shree Simandar Enterprises [2012 (283) E.L.T. 369 (Ker.)] 3. On the other hand, Shri D.D. Joshi, Asst. Commissioner (AR) reiterated the impugned order. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made by both the sides. 5. In the present case there is no dispute that the amount for which the refund is sought for by both the appellants are over and above the adjudged amount confirmed in the demand order dated 7-5-1997 therefore it is clear that this amount is, in principle, refundable to the persons who deposited. From TR 6 challan it is seen that the total amount was deposited jointly by M/s. ISI Bars Ltd. and M/s. India Steel International, therefore obviously ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... review petition justifying the insistence on the production of original documents also does not impress me at all. When an import is assessed to duty and penalty and fine are imposed, necessarily, the assessing authority maintains a file in relation to the same, which will contain all the documents in original relating to the levy. When payment is made pursuant to the orders of the assessing authority, details of the same would also be available in that file. When appeal is filed by the importer against the orders of the assessing authority the file will contain orders and details relating to the same also. Therefore, there is no difficulty for the assessing officers to decide the claim for refund based on those documents, when the appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
