9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (1) TMI 112X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,518/- under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. In the refund claim the party contended that they were entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 4/97, dated 1-4-97 as the plastic material imported by them is falling under Chapter 39 and it is produced out of scrap/waste falling under Chapters 9, 54, 55, 59, 64 or 85. The Assistant Commissioner (Customs) vide his order dated 30-7-98 rejected the refund claim by observing that the Bills of Entry had been finally assessed by the department and the claimant had paid duty accordingly. He observed that where a duty has been collected under a particular order which has become final, the refund of duty cannot be claimed unless such order is set aside according to law. So long as that order stan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... totally different context. It is contended that, in the case of M/s. Flock India Ltd., the order was a speaking order and it was clearly mentioned therein that the assessee may prefer an appeal against the said order to Collector (A). It is stated that, in the present case, no speaking order has been passed. An order allowing out of charge of the goods has simply been made on the Bills of Entry and therefore, it is stated that this decision is not applicable to the facts of the case. We have considered these submissions. The clearance of goods on payment of duty in this case is made by the proper officer under Section 47 of the Customs Act, 1962. It is well settled that such assessment is appealable and against it an appeal can be filed bef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... djudicating authority, subsequently by filing a claim for refund on the ground that adjudicating authority had committed an error in passing his order. If this position is accepted then the provisions for adjudication in the act and the Rules will lose their relevance and the entire exercise will be rendered redundant." 4. The above judgment is given by the Apex Court with reference to provisions under the Central Excise law. The principle laid in this judgment will equally be applicable to the cases under the Customs Act. 5. The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in C.C., Cochin v. Arvind Exports (P) Ltd. - 2001 (130) E.L.T. 54 (Tri.-L.B.) have held that exercise of power under Section 47 of the Act has the consequences of conferri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
