9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1508X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... they have paid ST/VAT on the imported goods lies on the respondent. The respondent has sought to discharge the said onus by C.A. certificate as there is a serious discrepancy noticed in the invoice as pointed out by Revenue. In these circumstances, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority and the respondents are directed to submit the C.A. certificate along with all documents relied upon by the C.A. in preparing the said certificate - appeal allowed by way of remand. - Application No. C/EH/93383/16 C/S/95046/15, Appeal No. C/87196/15 - A/94637/16/CB, M/94638/16/CB And 3/94639/16/CB - Dated:- 19-12-2016 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) Shri M. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner (Appeals) who observed that the explanation given by the respondent that there is an error in mentioning the correct Bill of Entry No. in the sales invoices in certain consignment was a possible explanation and he accepted the plea by observing as follows:- 9. I find that there is merit in the explanation given by the appellants. Admittedly, due to the fact that there were 7 Bills of Entry of the same date i.e. 30.08.2013 filed by the appellants, notwithstanding the fact that custom duty itself came to be paid on different dates, there can be a possibility of a human error that would arise in recording the correct details in the subsequent documents such as sales invoices, delivery challans etc. It seems such a situation h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... All of them are taken up for hearing together. 3. Learned A.R. argued that there are invoices prescribed under Central Excise Rule. It was argued that refund cannot be sanctioned without any clarification which confirm or certify as to clerical error in the invoices. It was argued that the respondent have not produced any such clarification from the Excise Department to prove that the said discrepancy was a clerical error. 3. Learned C.A. for the respondent argued that this was the case of the clerical error. He argued that they had applied to the Excise authorities and the excise authorities should have responded to their request. He further argued that they have submitted C.A. certificate supporting their claim of payment of servi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ound in the invoices total reliance of the certificate is not accepted. We find that the onus of proving that they have paid ST/VAT on the imported goods lies on the respondent. The respondent has sought to discharge the said onus by C.A. certificate as there is a serious discrepancy noticed in the invoice as pointed out by Revenue. In these circumstances, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the original adjudicating authority and the respondents are directed to submit the C.A. certificate along with all documents relied upon by the C.A. in preparing the said certificate. The said documents will be examined by the original adjudicating authority and the matter will be adjudicated afresh in respect of refund claim reject ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
