9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dence of duty has not passed on. On examination of records, it is seen that this submission is factually incorrect. The respondents have furnished the Chartered Accountants Certificate dated 10-03-2012. Further, the Board Circulars adverted to by the Consultant appearing for respondent clearly states that refund claim can be made by the Steamer agent. - Refund allowed. - Appeal No. C/2692/2012-SM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondents paid duty deposit amounting to ₹ 17,87,358/- equivalent to 110% of duty leviable on estimated bunkers. After reversion of the said vessel from coastal run to foreign run on 17-10-2010 at Mumbai Port, the Bill of Entry was finalised on the basis of actual consumption of bunkers and consumables and it was found that duty of ₹ 1,94,759/- had been paid in excess. As specified in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passing of incidence of duty does not arise. Secondly, that the person claiming the refund viz. M/s Atlantic Shipping Pvt.Ltd are basically Port agents who extend service for handling conversion /reversion of vessel from foreign run to coastal run and vis-versa. That being an agent, it cannot be presumed that the claimant had borne the incidence of duty. Thirdly, that the appellant has not produce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rly stated that the incidence of duty has not been passed on to any other person directly or indirectly. Further, that the Circular No.58/97 dated 06-11-1997 provides that the duty on bunkers like diesel, furnace oil, etc. may be recovered at 110% of the duty leviable on the quantity estimated to be consumed during the coastal run at the time of conversion from foreign run to coastal run on provis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tes that refund claim can be made by the Steamer agent. On similar set of facts and issues, the Tribunal in the appellant s own case has held the issue in favour of the appellants. Following the decision laid in the said judgment, in CCE, Pune Vs Atlantic Shipping Pvt.Ltd 2014 (307)ELT-776(Tri.Mum), I hold that the impugned order calls for no interference. 6. In the result, the appeal is dismis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
