9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1593X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss duty was paid, the customer M/s. BPCL issued a letter where it was mentioned that the actual unit price for the item is ₹ 36495 but the appellant has wrongly invoiced at ₹ 3,64,495/-. Accordingly, corresponding value and the duty was also charged on the higher side. However, the customer have corrected the invoice and the payment towards that invoice No. 439 dt. 30.4.2009 was made as per the reduced/corrected amount. I have also observed that in the payment advice issued by M/s. BPCL, it is clearly mentioned therein that against the invoice No. 439 dt. 30.4.2009 the payment of only ₹ 6,76,732/- was made, as against the value shown in the invoice i.e. ₹ 14,15,748/-. All the doubt stands cleared that the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laim for ₹ 54,054/- on 21.7.2009 alongwith documents such as ER-1 for April 2009, invoice purchase order etc. The adjudicating authority has rejected the claim on the ground that the descriptions of the goods are not tallying between the invoice and the purchase order. It was also mentioned that in the purchase order, the quantity of valve release shown as 35 whereas invoice No. 439 dt. 30.4.2009 is showing the quantity of 21, therefore the excess payment was not accepted by the adjudicating authority. Aggrieved by the adjudication order, the appellant filed appeal before Commissioner (Appeals), who concurring with the finding of the adjudicating authority, rejected the appeal of the appellant, therefore the appellant is before me. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al bill amount of ₹ 14,15,748/- only the payment of ₹ 6,76,732/- was made that means the excess charged price and value was reduced by correcting the value. He submits that on the said endorsement the P.O. number was given as 4502410755 the same P.O. number is appearing on the purchase order of the M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. He also referred to the payment advice issued by M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. dt. 13.7.2009 wherein against the Invoice No. 439 dt. 30.4.2009 the payment was made only for an amount of ₹ 6,76,732/- as against the total bill amount of ₹ 14,15,748/-. With these evidences, it is clear that the duty was charged in excess and that has been confirmed by M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corpo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
