9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AR for the Appellants Shri Ankur Jain, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER Per V Padmanabhan: The present appeal filed by Revenue is against the order-in -appeal No. 660/2015 dated 19.6.2015 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), New Delhi. The respondents imported sports goods and filed several Bill of Entries. These Bill of Entries were assessed to CVD @ 12% and the respondents paid such CVD and cleared the goods. Subsequently, they realized that they were eligible for concessional rate of CVD at the rate of 6% as per Notification No. 2/2011 Cus dated 1.3.2011. Accordingly, they filed refund claim for the CVD which has been paid in excess of the concessional notification. The original authority vide its order dated 23.11.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt in the case of Aman Medical Products Ltd. (supra) has been reiterated by the same High Court in the case of Yu Televentures Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India [2016 (340) ELT 88 (Del)]] and Micromax Informatics Ltd. vs. Union of India [2016 (335) ELT 0446 (Del) ]. Accordingly, he submitted that there is no infirmity in the impugned order granting the refund. Relevant paragraphs of decision of High Court of Delhi in the case of Micromax Informatics Ltd. is reproduced for ready reference: 13 . As far as the present case is concerned, there was indeed no assessment order as such passed by the customs authorities. Although under Section 2(ii) of the Act, the word assessment includes a self-assessment, the clearance of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Bill of Entry and cleared the goods on payment of CVD and the rate of 12%. On realizing the concessional rate available for CVD, they subsequently filed the refund claim. It is to be noted that at the time of filing Bill of Entry and its assessment, there was no lis between the Revenue and the importer regarding the eligibility of concession as per the notification. The lis has arisen only with the filing of refund claim by the respondent as held in the decision of Hon ble High Court of Delhi, in the case of Aman Medical Products Ltd. (supra) . The High Court has distinguished the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Flock India and held that refund will be permissible in such cases when the lis was not there at th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
