No Written Consent as to Acceptance of Bills of Entry: CESTAT remands matter to pass Speaking Order [Read Order]

The Chennai Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), remanded back matter to pass speaking order as there was no written consent as to acceptance of Bills of Entry (BE).

The appellant, M/s. Kanam Latex Industries Pv. Ltd, had imported rubber gloves in bulk. The original authority had directed them to indicate MRP on the packets of imported rubber gloves and assessed the goods to additional duty of customs in terms of Central Excise Notification No.49/2008-CE(NT) dated 24.12.2008. They cleared the goods on payment of duty.

Aggrieved by the assessments done on both the Bills of Entry they have filed appeals before the Commissioner (Appeals), challenging the imposition of additional duty and seeking a direction to the Assistant Commissioner to refund the excess duty collected and are aggrieved that the Commissioner (Appeals) has rejected their appeals on the ground that the duty was not paid under protest nor the Bills of Entry have been assessed provisionally.

Hari Radhakrishnan, Counsel on behalf of the appellant stated that their only prayer was to remand the matters to the original authority so that the issue can be decided on merits as they were aggrieved by the order of the proper officer directing them to discharged CVD in terms of Notification No.49/2008- CE(NT) dated 24.12.2008 on the bulk goods imported by them.

The Counsel further argued that they have a very good case on merits and hence he humbly prayed that their appeals may be allowed by way of remand and the proper officer be directed to reassess the Bills of Entry and render justice.

G. Anandalakshmi appeared for the Revenue and reiterated the points given in the impugned orders.

The Coram consisting of SulekhaBeevi C.S., Member (Judicial) and M. Ajit Kumar, Member (Technical)observed that “Without a written acceptance it could not have been concluded by the Learned Commissioner (Appeals), that since the appellants have cleared the goods on payment of duty as suggested by the proper officer, they have accepted the assessment of the BE. The facts that there was no written consent by the appellant and that they were before him in appeal should have been reason enough for him to remand the matter to the lower authority for issue of a speaking order.”

Support our journalism by subscribing to TaxscanAdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.