9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 337X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he original authority for fresh adjudication - appeal allowed by way of remand. - C/650/2009-DB - Final Order No. 23245 / 2017 - Dated:- 15-12-2017 - Shri S. S. Garg, Judicial Member And Shri V. Padmanabhan, Technical Member Shri T.V. Ajayan, Advocate For the Appellant Shri N. Jagadish, Superintendent (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per : S. S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 10.09.2009 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the Order-in-Original and rejected the appeal of the appellant. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant is a Petroleum Refinery manufacturing petroleum products and refining crude oil. The appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ermined the CIF value by enhancing the same and consequently demanded the duty short due against the respective advance licences. CIF value was increased by including other costs like war risk insurance, adoption of quantity on the basis of bill of lading as against quantity received in the shore tank etc. Initially when the goods were provisionally assessed and entered into bond, the duty was debited to the advance licenses such debits did not require the appellant to pay duty in cash since the DEEC scheme allows import by debiting the duty to the advance license with a corresponding export obligation to offset the duty debited. The original authority rejected the refund and aggrieved by the same, appellant filed appeal before the Commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollected/recovered by appropriation. He further submitted that the demand outstanding was also not a confirmed demand as the matter having been appealed against by the appellant had not reached finality. He further submitted that the order of appropriation/recovery is not the order of assessment and in the instant case the order of assessment was Order-in-Original No. 113/2006 which had at no point in time been accepted by the appellant and the appellant had in fact filed an appeal against the same before the First Appellate Authority. The First Appellate Authority by Order-in-Appeal No. 25/2007 passed in respect of the Order-in-Original No. 113/2006 and five other orders rejected the appeals. Being aggrieved by the order of the appellate a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccordance with declaration of law has to be carried out by the Customs authorities in accordance with law. We also find that the appropriation made vide Order-in-Original No. 6/2007 dated 02.07.2007 was clearly untenable. In view of the judgment of the Apex Court, we are of the considered opinion that the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the matter is required to be remanded back to the original authority for fresh adjudication. The issue of refund now would be a matter consequential to the determination of duty if any payable upon finalization of assessment afresh as directed by the Hon ble Supreme Court. Therefore, we set aside the impugned order and remand the case to the Customs authorities for de novo adjudication of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
