9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 1091X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without challenging the Bill of Entry. In the present case, undisputedly, the duty was paid and borne by the appellant. - Refund to be allowed. Unjust enrichment - Held that:- the certificate issued by Company's statutory auditor to be accepted as sufficient evidence to establish that the incidence of duty has not been passed on - Further, If the claim for refund is not supported by necessary documents, the original authority ought to have returned the refund claim as defective and ought not to have passed any order on merits. The appellant then should be provided opportunity to rectify the defects. - Refund allowed - Decided in favor of assessee. - Appeal No. C/28528/2013 - Final Order No. A/30190/2016 - Dated:- 22-3-2016 - MS. SU ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of Bill of Entry dated 30-01-2013. It is the contention of department that a refund claim is not maintainable when the assessee did not challenge the assessment order before any appeal Forum and the assessment having become final, the refund cannot be allowed. Section 17 of the Customs Act, 1962, has been amended w.e.f 08-04-2011 to provide for self assessment as against assessment by Customs Officials. Simultaneously, amendment was brought forth in Section 27 also. Taking into consideration these amendments, the Tribunal in various judgments has analyzed the issue of eligibility of refund when Bill of Entry is filed on self assessment basis. The issue whether such Bill of Entry filed on self-assessment basis is required to be challenged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tant. The Commissioner (Appeals) has called for a report from the original authority in regard to the grounds of appeal. In this report, the original authority reported that the refund claim is hit by doctrine of unjust enrichment as the appellants failed to furnish any document. Though the appellants furnished Chartered Accountant Certificate, it was not considered at all. Though the Commissioner (Appeals) is also a fact finding authority it has not cared to call for any further document; but has simply brushed aside the certificate issued by the Chartered Accountant, as not reliable. 5. The Tribunal in the case of CGG Veritas Services Ltd Vs CST, Mumbai, 2015(38) STR 1139(Tri.Mum) accepted the certificate issued by Companys statutory ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
