AI Insights
The case involves M/s N.F.L. Impex Pvt. Ltd., the appellant, who contested the denial of a refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) paid during the import of goods, as per Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dated 14/07/2007. The refund was initially denied by the authorities on the grounds that the nomenclature and Tariff Heading on the sale invoices differed from those on the Bill of Entries. The appellant also raised concerns about the violation of natural justice, as no hearing was provided by the Original Adjudicating Authority. The Commissioner (Appeals) acknowledged the breach of natural justice but did not remand the case, citing lack of powers to do so. The Tribunal, recognizing the failure to adhere to natural justice, remanded the case back to the Original Adjudicating Authority for a fresh decision.
Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2097] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IDT) 634822 (null-ALLAHABAD)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
CESTAT-Customs
Pronouncement Date
19-11-2017
Judgement Text
"FAX 2 0532-2400149\n\nCUSTOM:\n38M\n\nSaf ADE\n\nRVICE TAX API TE PRIBL\nLines,Old Red Building,Alahabad-211001\nRegional Branch, Allahabad\n\nDated: 01/12/2097\nTo\n\nAppellant as per address in table below\n\nRespondent as per address in table below\n\nBR dated 20/14/2017\n\nTani clirected to transmit ke:\nCustoms Act, 1962,\n\nwith a corlified copy af arder passed by the ‘Tribunal under\n\nion 129-A(4) of the\n\nSUL. Registrar\n\nfication Appeal Name and Address of Appellant\nNFL IMPEX PVP, LTB,\n\n73/1, OLD RITHALA ROAD,\nSHAHABAD, DAULATPUR,\n\nDELHI\nvame and Address of\nRespondent\n° -C.C.E. NOIDA\nC-56/42, Sector-62, Noida-\n201307\nCopy To\nJAdyoe anes}:\n\nMohd, Faraz Ances (Advocate)\nB-25, Lajpat Nagar - LL,\n\nNew Delhi\n\nDelhi\n\n4 Bar Association, CESVAT, Allahabad\n\n5 Direetor Pubtications, Customs, excise. LP. Estate, Dellti\n\n/s Contax Publizations Pyt, Lad. £5\n\nB, Bhishin Pitamab Marg, PACICI Bank of Detenc\n\nColony New\n\n‘7 Company Law Institute of india Pvt. Ltd. 2 No.2 (ald 00.36), Vaithyram Sweet, 'P. Nagar, Chemnai-t7\n8 Taxmann Attied Service Pvt. Lid., 5432, New Rohtak Read, New Delhi-1 10005\n\n9 LAWCRUX Advisors Put. Lid, LAW House, [-8\n\nectur- IU, Faridabad 121003 (taryana)\n40 TaxindiaOnline.com Pv, Lad, 2nd Floor, Vasant Arcade, Vasa Kun}, New Dethi - 110070\nIt Mark Professional Services Pvt. Lid., [08 Everest Block, Aditya Enelave, Hyderabad ~ 38\n\n12 The {CFA society,\n\narjuna Hill, Punjagutta Myclerabad,-SO0082\n\n13 MIS Knowledge Proc\nGreund,Near Karkardeon\n\nPvt. d.(taxntanagementindia.com),t\n\niy sist Floor, Cross River Mall,CBD.\nt,Dethi-1 10032\n\nWOD.R, 15 Gffice C\n\n{6 Second Polder Copy\n\nSG Registrar\n\n\nIN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE\nTRIBUNAL\nREGIONAL BENCH : ALLAHABAD\nCOURT No. }\n\nAPPEAL No, C/548/2011-CU[SM]\n\n2 out of Order-in-Appeal No, [35/CUS/APPL/NOIDA/20L1 dated\n30/06/201) passed by Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs\n(Appeals), Noida}\n\nM/s N. EF. lmplex Pvt. Ltd. Appellant\nVs.\n\nCommissioner of Customs & Central Excise,\nNoida Respondent\n\nAppearance:\n\nShri Mohd. Faraz. Ane\nShri Modh, Altaf, Ass\n\ns, Advocate, for Appellant\nstant Commissioner (AR), for Respondent\n\nHon'ble Mrs. Axchana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial}\n\nDate of Fearing\nDate of Pronouncement:\n\nFINAL ORDER NO. ECE EA\n\nPer: Archana Wadhwa\n\nThe short issue involved in the present appeal relates to\nrefund of SAD paid at the time of import of the goods, in\nterms of Notification No, 102/2007-Cus. dated 14/07/2007.\nThe same stands denied by the Authorities below on the\nground that the nomenclature and the Tariff Heading\nmentioned in the sale invoices is different from the one\n\nmentioned in the Bill of Entries.\n\n2. itis also scen that the appellant had taken a grievance\n\nbefore Commissioner (Appeals) on the ground that Original\n\n\nCustoms Appeal Na. 34841 i\n\nAdjudicating Authority has passed the order in violation of\nprinciples of natural justice, in as much as, no hearing was\ngiven to them. Though, the Appellate Authority has observed\nthat natural justice has not been observed but he has not\nremanded the matter on the ground that he has no powers to\n\nremand.\n\n3. In as much as, the Original Adjudicating Authority has\n\nnot observed the principles of natural justice, | deem it fit to\nset aside the impugned order and remand the matter to\n\nOriginal Adjudicating Authority. Needless to say that the\n\nappellant would be given am opportunity to put forth their\n\ncase and all the ues involved in the appeal are being left\n\nopen for him to re-decide.\n\n4. Accordingly, the appeal is allawed by way of remand.\n\n{Pronounced in Court on\n\nSd/-\n\n(Archana Wadhawa}\n\nMember(sudicial)\n\nLasart\n\n\n"
