9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 148X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... K. Jayaraman, Member (T)]. - These appeals have been filed against the following Order-in-Appeals, all passed by the Commissioner of Custom (Appeals), Bangalore. (i) Order-in-Appeal No. 87/2004-Cus. (B) dated 16-6-2004: (ii) Order-in-Appeal No. 135/2004-Cus. dated 30-11-2004; (iii) Order-in-Appeal No. 07/2004-Cus. (B) dated 14-10-2004 (iv) Order-in-Appeal No. 106/2004-Cus. (B) dated 14-10-2004 2. Shri C. Shiva Dass, learned Advocate appeared on behalf of the appellant and Shri K. Sambi Reddi, Authorized Representative (JDR) for the Revenue. 3. We have heard both sides. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants M/s. ISRO Satellite Centre, Airport Road, Bangalore imported several items. Even though, they were ent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the provision of duty paid under protest will be applicable only when the assessee disputes the classification/valuation/cenvat credit availment and makes payment under protest subject to clarification of the matter at a latter stage, so that they can claim refund easily without the application of limitation of time bar. This provision cannot be made applicable at a latter stage but only at the time of payment of duty. Therefore, he has rejected the refund claim on account of time bar. In other words, he has upheld the order of the lower authority rejecting the refund claim. 3.2 On a very careful consideration of the issue and also on the basis of the submissions of the learned Advocate, we find that the appellant had to pay duty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the refund claim on account of technicalities. 3.3 Our attention was also invited to several decisions of this Tribunal wherein it was held that refund arising out of correction of clerical error is admissible under Section 154 even without filing the claim under Section 27. Goa Shipyard Ltd. v. CC, ACC, Sahar - 2007 (219) E.L.T. 888 (T) = 2006 (72) RLT 479 (CESTAT-Mum.) the ratio of that case is applicable to the present appeals also. Further, the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Collector of Customs, Chandigarh v. Oswal Woolen Mills Ltd. - 1995 (76) E.L.T. 408 (Tribunal) is also relevant. In this case also it has been held that Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962 being independent of Section 27 ibid, refund claim in te ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
