9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 982X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssification or valuation or description of the imported goods. Therefore there was no need to challenge the assessment. Unjust enrichment - Held that:- The appellant has produced a certificate from the Chartered Accountant who after verification of the records has certified that the amount of duty paid is shown as receivables under the head Customs duty receivables in the books of accounts of the appellant. But the said certificate has been rejected by the Commissioner(Appeals) on the ground which is not sustainable in law - on identical issue, the Tribunal in the case of Indian Institute of Science [2011 (4) TMI 1289 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] has allowed the appeal of the assessee and remanded the case back to the original authority to d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6/09/2015 that they had inadvertently failed to claim the benefits under Notification No.46/2011-Cust dt. 01/06/2011 and sought refund of the excess customs duty paid by them. thereafter they filed refund claim on 15/10/2015 seeking refund of excess duty of ₹ 5,61,194/- by enclosing all relevant documents including documents to prove that the claim was not barred by unjust enrichment. The Assistant Commissioner rejected the refund claim vide order dt. 13/01/2016 on the ground that the assessment of the Bill of Entry was as per the amended Section 17 of the Customs Act, 1962 and the customs duty was paid by the appellant on the basis of their own assessment and that assessment has attained finality being not challenged by the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 46/2011 due to sheer inadvertence and the Department after receiving communication from the appellant should have sanctioned the refund by correcting the Bill of Entry in terms of Section 154 of the Act. In support of this submission, he relied upon the decision rendered in the case of Indian Institute of Science Vs. CC [2015(320) ELT 577 (Tri. Bang.)] wherein it was held that clerical errors in Bills of Entry can be corrected at any point of time as per Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962 and there is no requirement to challenge the assessments. Revenue challenged the decision of the Tribunal before the High Court of Karnataka and the Hon ble Karnataka High Court maintained the decision of the Tribunal as reported in 2015(32) ELT A267(Kar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vables in the books of accounts of the appellant. But the said certificate has been rejected by the Commissioner(Appeals) on the ground which is not sustainable in law. Further I find that on identical issue, the Tribunal in the case of Indian Institute of Science has allowed the appeal of the assessee and remanded the case back to the original authority to decide the issue de novo after affording an opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The Revenue challenged the same before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka and the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed by the High Court cited supra. By following the ratio of the above said decision, I set aside the impugned order and remand the case back to the original authority to pass a fresh ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
