9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (5) TMI 109X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, and proceed to hear and decide the appeals themselves at this stage with the consent of both sides. 2. The brief facts are that the respondents herein imported truck cranes, which were allowed clearance under Heading 8426.41. The Commissioner (Appeals) in appeal filed by the importers held that the correct classification would be CTA Heading 8426.91 and the cases were remanded for consideration of this classification. The adjudicating authorities classified the goods under Heading 8426.91 on the basis of the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals). As a result, the importers claimed refund of excess duty paid, which had arisen as a result of consequential relief. The Deputy Commissioner before whom the claims for refund were considered, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turnover/gross profit by way of depreciation at a fixed or variable percentage every year. In the present case the excess duty claimed as refund having been depreciated and deducted in the profit and loss account from the gross profit, the same stands adjusted/appropriated from the gross sales turnover or gross receipt of hiring charges, thereby clearly indicating that it has been indirectly passed on to the clients/customers of the applicant over a period of time. From the above, I find that the excess customs duty claimed as refund has not been borne by the applicant but the same was capitalized and depreciation claimed every year by amortizing and including the same in hiring charges of the crane in question. By including the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... terms of Customs Act. The appellants have also produced a Chartered Accountant's certificate dated 22-5-2001 certifying that the appellants have borne the burden of extra duty paid which has been reflected in their balance sheet and has not been passed on to any other person. They have also stated that the impugned crane under import is being used by them for hiring purposes and since the hiring charges are fixed on all India basis by Crane Owners Association, the extra duty paid by them could not be recovered by increasing the hire charges. Therefore, we are of the view that the Revenue has not made out a case for reversing the orders of the Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, we uphold the impugned order and reject the appeals. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
