9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 233X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the appellants for the refund of the amounts of cess paid - The lower authorities were correct in rejecting the claim on the limitation as it is on the record that appellant had paid the amount in 2001 and 2002 and filed refund claims on 12.09.2005 - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - C/708-709/2007 - A/30927-30928/2017 - Dated:- 19-6-2017 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on shrimps was challenged by other exporters and Tribunal, Chennai held that cess is not leviable on export of prawns, shrimps as they are different from fish. On coming to the notice of the appellant that such decision was rendered, they filed refund claims before the lower authorities on 12.09.2005. The lower authorities did not agree with the contentions raised by the appellant and rejected t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat when any such tax/duty is collected without authority of law it has to be refunded back to them and it should be treated as deposit. It is his further submission that since the amounts paid are not cess/tax, the provisions of Section 26 and 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 which governs the refund of export duty or duty paid at the time of import is not applicable for the deposit collected by the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that agricultural produce cess is not leviable, accordingly the amounts collected by the department from these appellants needs to be return to them. We find that this proposition as made by the Ld. Consultant is incorrect, as the appellant while discharging the agricultural produce cess, during the relevant period, was not contesting the same either before any authorities, even assuming departmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
