9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1183X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e period of six months i.e. on 09/11/2007 but held that the refund claim filed by the appellants is not admissible as per the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. There is no mistake in the order dated 29/06/2018 passed by the Tribunal. The case laws as cited by the Ld. Advocate are not applicable to the facts of the present case. ROM application dismissed. - C/MA(ROM)-77030/2018 In Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lays down specific guidelines for assessment of iron ore fines, has been completely omitted to be considered by the Hon ble Tribunal. It is most respectfully submitted that assessment of export cargo involves substantial question of law, and to bring in uniformity transparency and clarity, the CBEC vide their above circular have issued guidelines, to be followed by the field formations. The said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rpose of resolving the present dispute. 3. The Ld. advocate also submits that the final order passed by the Tribunal does not find any mention of the Circular in which the CBEC had clarified that there can be a variance between the Load Port Report and the report at the Port of discharge in the FE content, the assessment of Iron Ore has to be finalized taking into consideration the FE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laneous Application of non-mentioning/non-consideration of circular No. 12/2014-Cus dated 17/11/2014. We find that this Bench of the Tribunal has passed a detailed order on the merits of the case and though holding that the refund claim was filed well within the period of six months i.e. on 09/11/2007 but held that the refund claim filed by the appellants is not admissible as per the provisions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
