9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 442X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C. & Industry Vs UOI [2013 (6) TMI 371 - DELHI HIGH COURT] relied upon. The period of export is deemed to be extended by another six months and customs duty consequently will not be liable on the said item - duty of customs paid on the said item deserves to be refunded to the appellant within a period of four months. Whether the refund granted to the 2nd consignment of test and measuring equipment exported after the period of one year? - Held that: - the period of export could be extended only by a further period not exceeding six months as per the further proviso to clause-5 of the Notification No. 157/90 Cus. - no scope of providing any relief of refund of duty of customs to the appellant. For first consignment, refund allowed. For ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -Cus dated 28.3.1990. ii. The goods have been re-exported but export has been made after the period of six months after the time limit of six months but within a period of one year from the date of import in case of one consignment and in case of other consignment re-export was made just after the period of one year. Reason for this delay has been explained to the Customs that their employee, who was dealing with the subject goods had left the job. iii. They rely on the following case laws pleading that their refund of the customs duty paid on the goods under ATA Carnet has been re-exported be allowed to them by setting aside the impugned order passed by Commissioner (Appeals). a. Federation of I.C.C. Industry Vs UOI [2013(289) E ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d view that in case of the appellant, for the first item of test and measuring equipment which has been exported within a period of one year from the date of import, this period of export is deemed to be extended by another six months and customs duty consequently will not be liable on the said item, therefore, whatever the duty of customs paid on the said item deserves to be refunded to the appellant within a period of four months of the issue of this order of the Tribunal. I have taken support for this decision from Hon ble Delhi High Court s decision in the case of Federation of I.C.C. Industry (supra) and CESTAT Kolkata s decision in the case of Banmore Electricals Pvt. Ltd (supra). Both these decisions give sufficient force and suppo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
