9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 1159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowed by way of remand. - C/22442/2014-SM - Final Order No. 20429 / 2017 - Dated:- 14-3-2017 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member Shri V.V. Shekar, CA JRS Co For the Appellant Dr. Ezhilmathi, AR For the Respondent ORDER Per S. S. Garg The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 16.4.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (A) has rejected the appeal of the appellant and upheld the Order-in-Original. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant M/s. Cochin Port Trust had e-auctioned and disposed 58 lots of un-cleared cargo, paying the customs duty assessed by the Import Group. Among the weight of 236.5 MTs arrived on transshipment from Chennai P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontrary to the provisions of the Act and also against the binding judicial precedents. He further submitted that the appellant filed an application for refund of excess duty paid ₹ 6,32,175/- on the short quantity of 128.68 MTs. He further submitted that the duty paid on 25.10.2013 for ₹ 11,61,874/- for 55 bundles of steel bars listed as weighing 236.5 MT. However, on checking the weight at the weighbridge at the exit gate immediately after clearance in the of the Traffic Manager of the Port Trust revealed that the actual quantity available in weight was only 107.82 MT resulting in short quantity of 128.68 MT. The party M/s. Hey Day who cleared the goods in auction was billed only for the actual quantity of 107.82 MT as evidence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons who have approved warehouse in terms of Section 9 and 10 of the Customs Act. The person referred to in Section 45(1) of the Customs Act is only a person approved by the Commissioner of Custom and it excludes a body of person who by virtue of law entrusted with the custody of goods by incorporation of law under another enactment i.e., Major Port Trust Act. 5. On the other hand, the learned AR reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 6. After considering the submissions of both the parties and the perusal of the material on record as well as the judgment of the Hon ble Bombay High Court cited supra, I am of the opinion that this case needs to be remanded back to the original authority with a direction to decide the claim of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
