9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 269X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant, in case, was to pay duty on the export consignment, which was ultimately refunded to him, the same should have been at the normal rate, which was @16% and as the duty was paid @ 9.6%, he had violated the provisions and as a consequence, demand was raised. The fact that the entire transactions were revenue neutral is not in dispute, as whatever duty appellant would have paid on the export consignment, the same was refundable to the appellant. When the appellant paid the duty @ 9.6%, the refund was also granted at the same rate. There was no difference as such. The effect of the transactions being revenue neutral, the action taken by the Department in raising demand of the differential duty, which, in fact, was not leviable at a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant deposited the duty @ 9.6%, though was not payable and even if paid, the appellant was entitled to refund thereof. Whatever the amount of duty was paid by the appellant on the export of goods, the same was refunded to the appellant. 5. On 23.7.2004, the appellant was issued a show cause notice (Annexure A-2) stating that on the export of goods outside the country, it was required to pay duty @ 16% instead of 9.6% and, hence, violated the provisions of the Rules and the notification issued thereunder. Demand for the differential amount of ₹ 1,43,010/- was sought to be raised. 6. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed the demand of Rs,1,43,010/-. It was held that the appellant was liable to pay interest under Section 11AB of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upon Commr. Of C.Ex., Pune-III vs. Siddheshwar Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd., 2015(320) E.L.T. 524 (Bom.), Commissioner of Cus. & C.Ex. vs. Textile Corpn. Marathwada Ltd., 2008(231) E.L.T. 195 (S.C.) and Arvind Ltd. vs. Union of India, 2014(300) E.L.T. 481 (Guj.). 11. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that once the appellant had chosen to pay duty on the goods exported outside the country, the same was required to be paid under the Act @ 16%. The appellant had choice either to pay or not, as any duty paid was refundable. However, if he had chosen to pay the same, then correct rate should have been applied. The demand was rightly created. The appellant should pay the amount demanded along with interest and at this st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
