9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 86X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s with respect to the date of filing of the Bill of Entry. Thus, the exemption of IGST as well as BCD + cess was available in respect of Bill of Entry, which was filed on 14.03.2018 and 31.03.2018. Further, the Government vide amending Notification No.01/2019-Cus. dt. 10.01.2019 have withdrawn the pre-import condition No. (XII) from Notification No.18/2015-Cus. in public interest. The Adjudicating Authority is directed to grant refund of ₹ 97,032/- alongwith interest as per Rule, within a period of 45 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Customs Appeal No. 51226 of 2020-SM - FINAL ORDER NO. 50300/2022 - Dated:- 30-3-2022 - MR. ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of import, along with interest or ₹ 97,032/-. 5. That the pre-import conditions were challenged before Hon ble High Court of Gujarat in case of Maxim Tubes Company Pvt. Ltd., Ors. Vs UOI, wherein the provisions of pre import condition were held ultra vires the Foreign Trade Policy, 2019-TIOL-459-HC-AHM-CUS. 6. That the appellant had discharged duty, levy was held as unconstitutional and ultra vires. Thus the appellant applied for refund of tax and interest, collected without authority of law, on 13.05.2018. As IGST amount was claimed as ITC and passed on to the customers, the refund of the same was not claimed but interest paid on IGST amount was sought as refund, amounting to ₹ 97,032.00 7. That the Deputy Commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deposited the said duties and interest on account of some directions from the DRI, but they had not given any such evidence, which is discussed in the impugned order That at the time of re-asessment the exemption was not available and the appellant was required to discharge the duty liability on such imports. I therefore find that since there was a delay in payment of duties in respect of the import made under above referred BoEs, interest on such delayed payment of duties was rightly paid in the instant case. 10. It was further observed, that the operation of judgement in case of Maxim Tubes Manufacturing Co Pvt. Ltd., has been stayed by Apex Court. 11. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 12. Learned C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment in September, 2018, in view of the exemption granted from IGST vide Notification No. 79/2017-Cus. Further, no IGST was payable in view of the ruling of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Maxim Tubes Company Pvt Ltd Vs UOI, wherein the provisions of pre-import condition imposed in the exemption notification were held ultra vires the Foreign Trade Police. It is further urged that the Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in observing that as the Bill of Entry were re-assessed in September, 2018, the exemption was available upto 31.03.2018. Learned Counsel assailing the said observation urges that the applicability of exemption etc. has to be judged as on the date of the filing of Bill of Entry and not with regard to date of finali ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
