9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 980X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant. Heard the Ld. AR for the Revenue. 2. These two appeals are filed against OIA No.JMN-CUSTM-000-APP-316-14-15 dated 02.02.2015 and OIA No.JMN-CUSTM-000-APP-317-14-15 dated 02.02.2015 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) of Customs, Ahmedabad. 3. The short issue involved in the present case is: whether the appellants are entitled to refund claims of Rs. 91,959/- (in Appeal No.C/10649/201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad fulfilled all the conditions laid down under Notification No.102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007, therefore, denial of refund only on the ground that the sales invoices was raised prior to out of charge, is contrary to the principle of law laid down by this Tribunal in the case of Radius Infotech vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi (CARGO EXPORT) - 2016 (337) ELT 305 (Tri. - Del.). 4. Ld. AR for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he goods by the Customs by itself does not prove that the goods have been sold and delivered to the buyers. It is also seen that the appellant has filed reconciliation certificate with calculation sheet certified by a Chartered Accountant containing details of Bills of Entry and sale invoices and payment of VAT/CST. Considering the factual position as explained above, I find that the rejection of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
