9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 335X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch protest was lodged by the appellant before to the said period. Therefore, as it is a fact on record that no evidence is available with regard to protest made by the appellant, therefore, the refund claim has been rightly rejected by the authorities below. The appellant has not challenged the assessment of Bills of Entry by way of appeal before the learned Commissioner(Appeals). In that circumstance also, the appeal is not maintainable in the light of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of ITC LIMITED VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KOLKATA -IV [ 2019 (9) TMI 802 - SUPREME COURT] . There are no merits in the appeal - appeal dismissed. - Customs Additional Evidence No. 20397 of 2021 Customs Appeal No. 26431 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r imports made during the period December 2005 to April 2009. Some of the claims where protest was lodged were allowed but rest of the refund claims were rejected for want of evidence of lodging protest. Aggrieved from by the said order, the appellant is before us. 3. Learned consultant appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that as the issue whether they are entitled for the benefit of exemption notifications was pending before this Tribunal; in that circumstance, the Bills of Entry filed during the impugned period are to be treated as filed under protest; therefore they are entitled for refund claim. He also heavily relied on a decision of Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of CCE Vs. Electro Steel Castings Ltd. [2014(299) ELT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... protest. The said affidavit is taken on record and is extracted below:- 7.2. On examining the said affidavit, we find that nowhere in the affidavit, it is mentioned on which date, the protest was lodged and before which authority. The affidavit is totally vague and since it cannot be said to be a supportive evidence. 7.3. Further we find that the appellant themselves has lodged a protest during the pendency of the appeal which is also taken on record and extracted below:- 7.4. No such protest was lodged by the appellant before to the said period. Therefore, as it is a fact on record that no evidence is available with regard to protest made by the appellant, therefore, the refund cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
