Del. HC: Obtaining of Voice Samples of Accused Must be in Compliance with Telegraph Act  ||  P&H HC: Peaceful Protest is Not a Penal Offence Under Section 188 IPC  ||  All HC: AO Must Consider Form 10 u/s 17 Supplied After Limitation But Before Assessment is Completed  ||  Ker. HC Issues Guidelines on Handling Digital Evidence Containing Sexually Explicit Materials  ||  Del. HC: Cyber Crimes Dissuade Aspirations of Advanced 'Digital Bharat'  ||  Del. HC: Suspension of Entity Can’t be Continued Indefinitely  ||  Del. HC: Woman Can be 'Karta' of HUF  ||  SC: Court Can’t Impose Bail Condition that Husband Must Resume Conjugal Life with Wife  ||  SC Takes Suo Moto Cognizance of Cal. HC Judgment that Adviced Adolescents on Sexual Behavior  ||  JKL HC: Court Can’t be Guided by Personal Law While Deciding Apportionment of Compensation    

Mohammad Shaheed v. The Commissioner of Customs - (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal) (27 Jun 2017)

Refund shall be effected on production of necessary documents of evidences



Present appeal is against impugned order dated 11.1.2016 passed by Commissioner of Customs (A) whereby Commissioner (A) set aside the Order-in-Original and allowed appeal of Appellant on condition that, refund is to be granted to Appellant only on production of necessary documents of evidences as demanded by original authority. Appellant submitted that, impugned order is not sustainable in law as same has been passed by ignoring specific direction of High Court of Kerala.

Original authority has rejected refund claim on ground which is not sustainable in law. Once High Court of Kerala in its order dated 12th November, 2014 had specifically given direction that, on producing identity and account details refund shall be effected to Petitioner within a period of four weeks and after judgment of Kerala High Court, Appellant has produced certificate obtained from Padi Village Office, Government of Kerala and also an affidavit clarifying that, Mohammad Shaheed, Sahid M and Sahid Mohammad are one and same person. Moreover, his identity was never in dispute from very beginning even during investigation. His statement was recorded and he is appearing before officers of custom and this reason has been coined by original authority only for purpose of denial of rightful claim of refund.

Now since, Appellant has clarified about his identity also, therefore there is no reason left for Respondent to deny refund claim. Therefore, in view discussions and examination of various orders passed by Revenue authorities as well as judgments of High Court of Kerala, Appellants are entitled for refund and therefore, Appeal of appellant allowed by setting aside impugned order. Appellants are entitled for interest as per law.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2023 - All Rights Reserved