9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 693X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ading of chemicals. For the purpose of conducting its business, the petitioner entity causes imports of consumables, chemicals and other materials from various countries. The petitioner entity has been favoured with an Importer Exporter Code (IEC), issued by the office of the JDGFT, Chennai and also favoured with PAN by the Income Tax Department. 2.2 During the course of its business, the petitioner caused import of "Propylene Glycol/BIC NF/Hydrogen Peroxide" covered under 50 Bills of Entries as stated in the affidavit filed along with this petition. Thereafter, the petitioner claimed refund in terms of Notification No.102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007 as amended by Notification No.93/2008 dated 01.08.2008 read with CBEC Circular No.6/2008-Cus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... akkam, Chennai. 3.3 The learned counsel for the petitioner also submitted that the Commissioner of Customs have concurrent jurisdiction and hence, there is no impediment for the authority to consider the claim of the refund and on that basis, prayed that the impugned order is liable to be quashed. 4. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that pursuant to 2(c) of Notification No.102/2007-Cus., dated 14.09.2007, the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner alone shall sanction and refund the claim made by the assessees. In view of the same, the learned Standing Counsel fairly submitted that the petitioner may be directed to file necessary refund claims before the jurisdictional Assistant Commissioner and on recei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the refund claim before the DC/AC at the Air Cargo as is done normally. Similarly, the DC/AC in the Customs House could have promptly transferred the said claim to the DC/AC in the Air Cargo. However, the order of the lower appellate authority transferring the refund claim to the dealing Assistant/Deputy Commissioner in the Air Cargo complex cannot be said to be not legal and proper, even though he has passed the said order or other reasons. Accordingly, we uphold the impugned order and dismiss the appeal filed by the department. The stay application filed by the department also stands disposed of." 7. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 07.05.2015 passed by the second respondent is set aside and the second respondent is dire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
