SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

Cus - When there is nothing on record to show that appellant had connived with other three persons to import AA batteries under the guise of declaring goods as Calcium Carbonate, penalty imposed on appellant are set aside: HCCongress fields Rahul Gandhi from Rae Bareli and Kishori Lal Sharma from AmethiCus - The penalty imposed on assessee was set aside by Tribunal against which revenue is in appeal is far below the threshold limit fixed under Notification issued by CBDT, thus on the ground of monetary policy, revenue cannot proceed with this appeal: HCGST -Since both the SCNs and orders pertain to same tax period raising identical demand by two different officers of same jurisdiction, proceedings on SCNs are clubbed and shall be re-adjudicated by one proper officer: HCFormer Jharkhand HC Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra appointed as President of GST TribunalSale of building constructed on leasehold land - GST implicationI-T - If assessee is not charging VAT paid on purchase of goods & services to its P&L account i.e., not claiming it as expenditure, there is no requirement to treat refund of such VAT as income: ITATBengal Governor restricts entry of State FM and local police into Raj BhawanI-T - Interest received u/s 28 of Land Acquisition Act 1894 awarded by Court is capital receipt being integral part of enhanced compensation and is exempt u/s 10(37): ITATCops flatten camps of protesting students at Columbia UnivI-T - No additions are permitted on account of bogus purchases, if evidence submitted on purchase going into export and further details provided of sellers remaining uncontroverted: ITATTurkey stops all trades with Israel over GazaI-T- Provisions of Section 56(2)(vii)(a) cannot be invoked, where a necessary condition of the money received without consideration by assessee, has not been fulfilled: ITATGirl students advised by Pak college to keep away from political eventsI-T- As per settled position in law, cooperative housing society can claim deduction u/s 80P, if interest is earned on deposit of own funds in nationalised banks: ITATApple reports lower revenue despite good start of the yearI-T- Since difference in valuation is minor, considering specific exclusion provision benefit is granted to assessee : ITATHome-grown tech of thermal camera transferred to IndustryI-T - Presumption u/s 292C would apply only to person proceeded u/s 153A and not for assessee u/s 153C: ITATECI asks parties to cease registering voters for beneficiary-oriented schemes under guise of surveys
 
CX - Since duty liability on goods exported was discharged and refund claim was filed beyond six months, provision of Sec 11B gets attracted: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

MUMBAI, NOV 15, 2016: THIS is an appeal filed by the assessee in the year 1997 against an o-in-a of November 1996.

The issue is whether appellant is entitled for refund of the duty paid on the goods i.e. scooters cleared by them for export.

The matter was decided recently.

The Appellant had cleared scooters for home consumption on payment of duty to the dealers; few scooters were returned back for reconditioning/repairing.D-3 intimation in respect of the returned goods was filed and after reconditioning, the scooters were exported under bond without payment of duty. Against the AR-4 dated 06.10.1995 filed for export, the appellant filed a refund application on 23.01.1996 for refund of duty initially paid on such goods.

Both the lower authorities rejected the refund claim on the ground that the same was filed after six months from the date of payment of duty and is, therefore, hit by limitation. Incidentally, the Commissioner (A) had opined that the appellant ought to have followed rule 173L of CER, 1944 in order to claim the refund of duty paid rather than Rule 173H of CER.

Before the Tribunal, the appellant submitted that when the goods are exported no duty has to be levied hence duty paid by them initially should be refunded to them.

The AR justified the rejection of refund claim.

The Bench observed -

++ Refund claim filed by the appellant is undisputedly beyond the period of six months from the date of payment of duty which was initially cleared for home consumption to their dealers. The provisions of Rule 173H which are followed by the appellant for receiving the duty paid goods back and removing them after reconditioning or repairing would not amount to discharge of duty liability when the goods are cleared after reconditioning.

++ Since duty liability on the goods exported was discharged and the refund claim was filed beyond six months, provision of Section 11B gets attracted and refund claim has to be held as hit by limitation.

Holding that the findings of the lower appellate authority is correct, the impugned order was upheld and the appeal was rejected.

(See 2016-TIOL-2966-CESTAT-MUM)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.

TOP NEWS

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST