9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1503X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 3,17,620/- on goods that were finally cleared in December 2015 against assessment of February 2015 and the issue of detention certificate. 2. The background of this case is the import of ball bearings from Hongkong vide bill of entry no.8237222 dated 7th February 2015 and the declared value of Rs. 12,28,585/-, not being acceptable to the proper officer of customs, was re-determined as Rs. 17,58,424/- with differential duty of Rs. 1,36,976/-. Instead of clearing the goods at the re-determined assessment, appellant went in appeal and sought for order-in-assessment which was issued on 1st July 2015. On appeal before the first appellate authority, the re-determination was set aside in order dated 30th September 2015 following which the duty, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es and that the provisions of the circular would have been implemented had such approach been made to the proper authority. As there can be no doubt that the competent authority would be guided by the circular referred to, and as the issue has been raised by the Learned Consultant, it is directed that the interest thereon on the pre-deposit be released to the appellant without delay. 6. The claim of the appellant for being relieved of the interest charge of Rs. 39,550/- is based on the absence of an order of assessment for them to comply with once the re-determined assessment order had been set aside. Learned Consultant contends that, as far as the appellant is concerned, the liability in the assessment order had been discharged promptly a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he liability arises only on fresh determination. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Income Tax Officer, Kolar & Anr. v. Seghu Buchiah Setty, AIR 1964 SC 1473. '16. What is the effect, therefore, of the Original Order being set aside by the First Appellate Authority, by the Tribunal, by the High Court or by the Supreme Court. Section 11AA provides for interest in case a person is charged with duty under sub-section (2) of Section 11A and fails to pay such duty. In other words there must be duty which is ascertained which has to be payable. If the Original Order is set aside then there is no duty which is ascertained which is payable and consequently no interest would be payable. As noted earlier interest is compensa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he intent of the Legislature. The intent of the Legislature appears to be that in a case of increase of duty, the increased tax becomes payable not from the original date, but from the date on which it is increased and in the case of reduction it relates back to the first date.' 7. Furthermore, reliance is also placed on the decision of the Tribunal in South India Corporation Agencies Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, sea, Chennai [2004 (178) ELT 229 (Tri. Chennai)] '13 ... .... As regards, the findings of the Id. Commissioner (Appeals) that re-assessment can only be done under Section 17(4), it is noticed that this view of the Commissioner is not correct because it is not a case where they had withheld any information or it was a case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tting aside of the re-determination by an appellate order restores the original self-assessment which had been in existence from the date of filing of the bill of entry. 9. It would appear that the contention of the Learned Authorised Representative is consistent with the decision in re Blue Star Limited and, in the context of reduction in duty liability, the payment falls due from the date of self-assessment. In the instant case, the appellant could not have any cavil with the self-assessed amount of Rs. 3,17,620/-. Any refund payable by the Central Government of pre-deposited amount with resolution of dispute before appellate authority in favour of assessee entails eligibility for interest. Had the appellant sought the intervention of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arns the logistics service provider not to collect any rent or demurrage in specified circumstances. There is no dispute that the goods were not seized or confiscated and it is questionable whether the goods had actually been detained when the appellant was at liberty to clear their goods on payment of duty. Detention follows on order issued to a custodian not to release goods without the approval of the competent authority. Such an order is not seen on the record, nor has it been produced by the appellant. 11. Nevertheless, it is seen from the facts and circumstances that the re-determination of the assessable value on the goods imported by the appellant was set aside and the original declaration accepted. Had re-determination not occurre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
