9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 535X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... avind, Advocate for the Respondent ORDER The above appeal is filed by the department against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) who rejected the appeal filed by the department against the sanction of refund by the original authority. 2. The learned AR Shri M. Selvakumar appeared and argued for the department. It is submitted that the respondent had filed the refund clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nature. The amount involved being less than Rs.50 lakhs, as per the litigation policy in regard to Customs cases would apply and the appeal filed by the department has to be dismissed in limine. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the facts are that the respondents had imported goods and thereafter had intended to re- export them. They had paid the entire anti-dumping duty as well as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under section 26A and not the eligibility of drawback, the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the department's appeal with a direction to the respondent to prefer a drawback claim. The respondent thereafter submitted a representation for drawback claim and also deducted 2% of the refund amount paid for the reason that in case of drawback, the respondent would be eligible only for 98% of the refund / ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rity has made inquiry and on verification found that the respondent is eligible for refund. For these reasons, we find no merit in the appeal filed by the department. 7. Further, the amount involved is less than Rs.50 lakhs and there is no legal issue or the issue is not recurring in nature. The department's appeal falls within the litigation policy also and is to be dismissed. 8. In the result, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
