9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 985X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Respondent sought amendment to bills of entry as per the provisions of section 149 and/or 154 of the Customs Act, 1962 which was not responded to - Held that:- eligible benefit of the notification could not be extended to assessee due to an error and non updation of the program in the EDI system, cannot be held against an assessee, only on the ground that they had not challenged the assessment fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04/2009. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. The issue involved in this case is regarding the refund of the amount of Customs Duty paid by the respondent in excess. 4. The respondent had filed two bills of entry and claimed benefit of notification no. 56/2008 dated 29/04/2008. The bills of entry were dated 15 th April, 2008 and 9 th June, 2008 and for import of feroniodium. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the benefit of notification no. 21/2002 and 56/2008. 6. The grounds of appeal as put up by the learned departmental representative and in the appeal memoranda indicate that the revenue is aggrieved by order only on the ground that respondent had not challenged the assessment of the said bills of entry and paid basic Customs Duty without any challenge hence, the ratio of the Apex Court judgment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ind the respondent has sought amendment to bills of entry as per the provisions of section 149 and/or 154 of the Customs Act, 1962 which was not responded to. We find that the eligible benefit of the notification could not be extended to assessee due to an error and non updation of the program in the EDI system, cannot be held against an assessee, only on the ground that they had not challenged th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
