2018 (10) TMI 1806

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... RDER This appeal challenges the denial of refund of pre-deposit of Rs. 22,500/-. 2. The adjudicating authority vide Order-in-Original No. 57033/2017, dated 21-7-2017 was convinced that there was double payment towards pre-deposit, for filing of the appeal apparently before the CESTAT which was required to be refunded as the same was covered under Section 27(1B)(a) and (b) of the Customs A .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hennai. On a perusal of the orders, I find that the appellant had all along claimed that it had remitted the above pre-deposit amount in the name of the importer by mistake and after realizing the same, they made another remittance of the same amount in their name as pre-deposit vide Challan No. MCM/0060827, dated 12-6-2017 which was also accepted and thereafter, they claimed refund of the first p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... emsp;The importer's NOC placed before the lower appellate authority also clearly supports the fact that the pre-deposit was only made by the appellant in the name of the importer which only implies that the same was not made by the importer itself. This being the case, there is no scope for double claim i.e., dual claim with regard to a single pre-deposit/refund. 7. A perusal of the TR chal .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X