9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (6) TMI 159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id by M/s Neel Metal Products Ltd., Pace City - II, Sector - 36, Mohammadpur Jharsa, Near Khandsa Village, Gurugram, Haryana (Importer) while importing "Seamless Steel Tubes" under Bills of Entry No. 5936233 dated 11.04.2018 & No. 5995925 dated 16.04.2018. The Appellant had purchased the impugned goods (Seamless Steel Tubes) from M/s Neel Metal Products Ltd. and their purchase value was inclusive of Anti Dumping Duty paid by Ms Neel Products Ltd. The Refund claim was filed on the ground that Anti Dumping Duty was not leviable if the imported goods were used for manufacture of gas cylinders, by a producer(s) approved by the Chief Controller of Explosives, Petroleum & Explosives Safety Organisation, Government of India. 4. The Adjudicating A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duly authorised by the Chief Controller of Explosives. Admittedly, appellant filed the refund claim within four months from the date of purchase, wherein such claim was filed on 12.11.2018. 7. After filing of the refund claim deficiency memo dated 08.01.2019 was issued for the following defects:- (i) importer is Neel Metal Products but refund claim have been filed by FJM Cylinders Pvt Ltd (appellant) (ii) Original (importer) copy of bill of entry not submitted. (iii) Certificate of Chartered Accountant with respect to unjust enrichment not submitted. (iv) To clarify, if the importer is approved by Chief Controller Explosives. 8. In response, the appellant appeared before the concerned deputy Commissioner and filed the required de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is no findings as regard the aforementioned premises and the refund have been rejected for reason unknown to law, and in total disregard to the provisions of Section 27 (1) (b) of the Act. Accordingly, he prays for allowing the appeal with consequential benefits. 13. Learned AR for revenue relies on the impugned order. 14. Having considered the rival contentions, I am satisfied that the rejection of refund is on the face of it illegal and against the provisions of law particularly, Section 27 (1) (b) of the Act. Section 27 (1) (b) provides for refund to a person, when such person has borne the duty or interest, which was not legally chargeable from him under the scheme of the Act r/w Rules and notification thereunder. Admittedly, in the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
