9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 496X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claim under Section 27 of the Act. A reading of Section 154 of the Act gives us an impression that clerical or arithmetical error which has occurred in orders passed by the Government Board or any officers of that Department, or errors arising from such order due to accidental slip or omission alone can be corrected. However, what is to be borne in mind is the procedure prescribed for amendment of bills of entry or for amendment of export documents which are documents originating from the exporter or importer. However, so far as the orders to be passed under the provisions of the Act is concerned, the power to correct the same can vest only with the authorities. Therefore, Section 154 of the Act specifically deals with such a power. In the instant case, the assessee cannot correct the order, but the fact remains, an invoice which did not form part of the bill of entry was inadvertently included, assessed to tax and tax was also paid. The same invoice was subject matter of another bill of entry which was assessed to tax and tax was cleared. Therefore, the error is apparent on the face of the order. The direction, finding rendered by the Tribunal that the assessee is entitle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate bill of entry dated 27.09.2006, which was permitted to be cleared on payment of duty. Thus, the assessee claimed that for the same invoice, the assessee has paid duty twice and the balance amount requires to be refunded. In this regard, a representation was submitted on 29.09.2006 to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Refunds), that is, within three days from the date on which the excess duty was paid against the bill of entry dated 25.09.2006. 5.The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Refunds) by order dated 07.11.2006, informed the assessee that they have claimed refund of excess duty paid against the said bill of entry covered under invoice dated 17.08.2006, which was wrongly included in the bill of entry and subsequently, they were cleared under another bill of entry, on payment of duty. It appears that considering the genuineness of the claim made by the assessee, the Refunds officer advised them to get the order of assessment of the bill of entry dated 25.09.2006 reviewed by the concerned apprising group or modified by way of an appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 128 of the Act, and file a refund claim, if the review/modification is in favour of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng Officer and the first appellate authority were only guided by the legal principles without even looking into the factual position. 10.In our considered view, there would be no necessity for the Assessing Officer to refer to the various decisions, nor for the first appellate authority to refer to the decisions in the case of Priya Blue Industries Limited v. Commissioner of Customs (Preventing), 2004 (172) ELT 145 (SC); Commissioner of Central Excise v. Flock India, 2000 (120) ELT 285 (SC); and Super Cassette Industries (supra), since all that was required to be considered by the Department was whether an error has occurred from any accidental slip or omission. Therefore, the first appellate authority held that without filing an appeal against the assessment of the bill of entry, the question of maintaining the refund claim does not arise. 11.With regard to the power under Section 154 of the Act, the first appellate authority held that unless the error is committed by the Department, the same cannot be rectified. The assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal after considering the submissions made by the assessee and the Revenue, took note of Section 154 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aspect as to whether a mistake has occurred or not, rejected the claim on the ground that the assessee has not challenged the assessment order when the fact remained that the assessee was before the Assessing Officer requesting for reassessment and this request was made well within the appealable time available to the assessee. 15.At the first instance, a reading of Section 154 of the Act gives us an impression that clerical or arithmetical error which has occurred in orders passed by the Government Board or any officers of that Department, or errors arising from such order due to accidental slip or omission alone can be corrected. However, what is to be borne in mind is the procedure prescribed for amendment of bills of entry or for amendment of export documents which are documents originating from the exporter or importer. However, so far as the orders to be passed under the provisions of the Act is concerned, the power to correct the same can vest only with the authorities. Therefore, Section 154 of the Act specifically deals with such a power. The said provision does not in any manner restrict the exercise of power when a clerical or arithmetical mistake is pointed out by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
