9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1412X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Customs (which has since been annulled by the Delhi High Court in the decision in Allen Diesels India Pvt. Ltd. [ 2016 (2) TMI 247 - DELHI HIGH COURT ], the appellant did not satisfy a pre-condition for claiming refund, the fact remains that the payment of 4% SAD effected by the appellant at the time of import of the goods, albeit by debiting the DEPB scrips, was accepted by the Customs Authorities, who recognised the said payment as in the discharge of the appellant's liability in respect of the import duties at the time of import of the goods. If that be the case, then notwithstanding the Circular dated 29.04.2013 aforementioned, the respondents cannot take a stand that there was no payment of the 4% SAD by the appellant at the time ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... export. On certain occasions, raw materials are also imported for the purposes of meeting its export obligations. 3. It is the case of the appellant that while importing goods it used to pay the basic customs duty and special additional duty of customs, by debiting the duty amounts in the Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEPB) scrips that were obtained by it as export incentives under the DEPB export promotion scheme. Thereafter, whenever a duty exemption was claimed, the same would be made available to the exporters either by way of re-crediting the scrips with the refund amount or by paying the refund amount in cash to them. In the instant case, the appellant had paid the 4% Special Additional Duty (for short, 'SAD') by debiting the DE ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. He therefore dismissed the Writ Petition after finding that the claim for refund preferred by the appellant could not be processed. 5. Before us, it is the submission of Sri. Baby M.A, the learned counsel for the appellant that the learned Single Judge erred in not considering the fact that the appellant had actually paid the 4% SAD at the time of import, albeit by debiting the DEPB scrips, and that this payment was in fact accepted by the Customs Authority as being in due discharge of its liabilities under the Customs Act and Rules. It is contended, therefore, that on the appellant satisfying the condition for refund of SAD as envisaged under Notification No.102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007 the respondents could not have denied the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the subsequent Circular issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs (which has since been annulled by the Delhi High Court in the decision in Allen Diesels India Pvt. Ltd (Supra)), the appellant did not satisfy a pre-condition for claiming refund, the fact remains that the payment of 4% SAD effected by the appellant at the time of import of the goods, albeit by debiting the DEPB scrips, was accepted by the Customs Authorities, who recognised the said payment as in the discharge of the appellant's liability in respect of the import duties at the time of import of the goods. If that be the case, then notwithstanding the Circular dated 29.04.2013 aforementioned, the respondents cannot take a stand that there was no payment of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
