9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 442X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Respondent. ORDER Per : ASHOK K. ARYA The appellant namely M/s Electro Systems Associates Pvt. Ltd., is in appeal against the order of Commissioner (Appeals), who has upheld the order-in-original where under the refund claims of the appellant were rejected. The subject refund claims are for the refund of customs duty of Rs. 43632/- paid on 29.11.2011 and Rs. 89,794/- paid on 29.02.2012. 1. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods 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 goo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns of both the sides along with case laws quoted have been carefully considered. 5. The appellant is on the record saying that in case of one consignment of test and measuring equipment, the said item was re-exported within a period of one year of import. The Notification No 157/90-Cus (supra) under which item was initially imported provides in its clause that item imported under the facility of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 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. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on No. 157/90-Cus (supra) have not been complied with, when re-export was made after one year of its import. Consequently there is no scope of providing any relief of refund of duty of customs to the appellant in present ATA Carnet facility and under Notification No 157/1990-Cus. 7. Considering above discussions and the analysis, it is held that for the first consignment of the subject item the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
