9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 605X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... RDER The appellant is aggrieved by the rejection of refund claim submitted for refund of SAD in terms of Notification No.102/2007-Cus. dated 14.09.2007 as amended by Notification No.93/2008 dated 01.08.2008 read with Board's Circular No.6/2008-Cus. dated 28.04.2008 and 16/2008-Cus. dated 13.10.2008. 2. On behalf of the appellant Ld. Counsel Shri S. Murugappan appeared and argued the matter. He s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rule out unjust enrichment. He adverted to page 21 of the appeal paper book and argued that vide letter dated 14.05.2010 the appellant has submitted the Chartered Accountant certificate as well as all other documents. This letter bears the endorsement of the department evidencing that the letter along with the documents have been received by the department on 18.05.2010. In spite of this, the adj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s rejected on the ground that the appellant has not produced the Chartered Accountant certificate to establish that the burden of 4% Additional Duty has not been passed on to another. In page 21 of the appeal paper book, the appellant has produced a letter dated 14.05.2010 in which it is stated that in continuation of their refund claim submitted they are producing further documents. On perusal of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est, both sides incur litigation expenses also, of which the expense of the department is borne from the public exchequer. These type of unnecessary litigations have to be avoided. 6. In the result, the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority who is directed to process the refund claim on the basis of documents produced by the appellant. The appellant shall be given an opportunity of per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
