9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 1287X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e which did not stand concluded in terms of the judgment which was rendered on 06 August 2018. There are no ground to interfere with the order impugned - appeal dismissed. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA And HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA For the Appellant : Ms. Sonu Bhatnagar, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Monica Benjamin Ms. Nishtha Mittal, Advocates For the Respondent : Mr. Tarun Gulati, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kishore Kunal, Ms. Diva Devarsha Mr. Anuj Kumar, Advocates ORDER CM APPL. 56082/2023 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. This application stands disposed of. CUSAA 80/2023 1. This appeal has been preferred by the Principal Commissioner assailing the validity of the order passed by the Customs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s contemplated in Section 27 (2), notwithstanding any judgment, order or decree of the court. This Court is at a loss to observe the relevance of that reasoning, given that SRF Limited (supra) had ruled in principle that import implied a deemed manufacture, without any corresponding obligation on the part of the importer to have availed CENVAT credit. As such, the amount claimed was not duty and could not have been recovered by the Customs authorities in the first instance, given the declaration of law in SRF Limited (supra). Therefore, they cannot now seek shelter under Section 27 (3) to resist a legitimate refund claim. 13. The impugned order is hereby quashed. The refund application moved by the petitioner shall be decided on its merits, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion before this Court. Pending application(s) shall stand disposed of. 4. It is the contention of Ms. Bhatnagar, learned counsel appearing in support of the appeal, that in light of the observations rendered by the Supreme Court while disposing of the Special Leave Petition, the appellant would stand enabled to raise all issues before this Court, including those relating to limitation as well as unjust enrichment, as had been urged before the Tribunal. 5. We find ourselves unable to accede to that submission bearing in mind the undisputed fact that the judgment rendered inter partes on 06 August 2018 has attained finality. Even the Supreme Court in its order of 15 September 2023 has not interfered with the judgment handed down by this Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntant s certificate was wrong or to establish that the duty was indeed passed on to the buyers. Learned special counsel also asserted that M/s Naveen Associates were not the statutory auditors of the respondent. Learned counsel for the respondent asserts that they were their statutory auditors during the relevant period. In the absence of any evidence by the Revenue on this count, the submission by the respondent that during the relevant period, M/s Naveen Associates were their Chartered Accountants must be accepted. Even otherwise, there is no requirement in law that a certificate must be issued only by the statutory auditors. So long as the certificate is issued by a Chartered Accountant and it is consistent with the accounts such as Bala ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
