9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 498X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lam, Adv ORDER PER: M.V.RAVINDRAN. This appeal is filed by the Revenue against order-in-appeal No. HYD CUS-000-APP-118-17-18 dated 12/01/2018. 2. After hearing both sides, I find that the issue lies in a very narrow compass. 3. The respondent herein had filed bills of entry which were self-assessed and subsequently noticing that they have not claimed the benefit of Notification which was due to them, filed refund claims which got rejected. On an appeal, the 1st appellate authority by the impugned order set aside the order-in-original and remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority for reassessment and consequent refund. 4. The grounds of appeal as filed by the revenue in the appeal memoranda is as unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the decision of the Hon ble High Court in case of Aman Medical Products Ltd., will be in jeopardy and will not have any precedential value inasmuch as the Hon ble Apex Court has granted the Special Leave and the appeal is entertained. Accordingly, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) appears to have erred in placing reliance on the above cited decision which has not attained finality. 2.2 As per Sub-Section (2) of Section 2 of the Customs Act, 1962, assessment includes Self-assessment and further Sub-Section (2) of Section 17 of the Act, ibid allows the proper officer for verification of the selfassessment made by the importer and allows for re-assessment under SubSection (4) of Section 17 of the Act, ibid. Thus, in both the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uty cannot be considered without the order being modified in appeal is correct or not. I find that the concerned Bills of Entry had been self-assessed on the basis of declarations made by the appellant-importer at the time of filing the Bills of Entry under Section 46 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant has come before this appellate authority without seeking re-assessment of the goods which is an option available to them. However, the appeal arisen presumably in view of the prevalent, but in my considered view a wrong perception, that the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Priya Blue Industries Ltd., Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) [2004 (172) ELT 145 (SC)] would apply to the facts of the instant case. It is my v ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by Department is required to be followed. To this extent, the ratio of the judgement in the case of Priya Blue Industries Ltd does not apply to the facts of this case. In this case as mentioned earlier, an order of assessment by the proper officer has not been made. Duty was paid on self-assessment made in the Indian EDI System and out of charge of goods granted. The order granting out of charge is not an assessment order made by the proper officer of customs having regard to the classification and valuation of goods. Therefore, the appellant is entitled to reassessment of goods to duty in the hands of the proper officer of customs on the basis of the claim for refund made and as per law. The entitlement of the appellants to exemption from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
