Albert David Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Albert David Ltd. vs Commissioner of Customs

Type Court Judgment Court Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi Decided May 24, 2004

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/35352

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/35352
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Judge: K Usha, S Kang, N T C.N.B.
Decided On: May 24, 2004
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Albert David Ltd.

Respondent

Commissioner of Customs

Legal References

Reported In: (2004)(96)ECC435

Excerpt

1. the question to be considered in this case is whether the ratio of the decision of the supreme court in cce, kanpur v. flock (india) pvt.ltd. [2000 (120) e.l.t. 285 (s.c.) = 2000 (40) rlt 131 (s.c)] which arose in application under rule 11 of erstwhile central excise rules (present section 11b) shall be applied to an application for refund under section 27 of the customs act, 1962. a similar issue was considered by us in our final order no. 423/2004-nb(a), dated 17-5-2004, 2. in the above mentioned case the appellant submitted that when contentions are raised by the assessee and an adjudication order is issued it will not be open for the assessee to challenge the adjudication order on the bill of entry merely by filing an application of refund. the position will be different when there is no lis between the parties and it was only a mere assessment on the bill of entry. in the facts of the case it was submitted that there was a lis between the parties. therefore, we held that the application filed by the appellant therein for refund under section 27 was only to be rejected by applying the ratio of the decision in flock india. but we expressed no view on the contention taken by the appellant regarding mere assessment of bill of entry without a lis involved.3. in the present case also identical contentions are raised. it is submitted that there is lis between the parties. under these circumstances, we dismiss the appeal following our order, dated 17-5-2004. we make it clear that we are not expressing any view on the contention of the appellant that if it is only a mere assessment of bill of entry, the ratio of flock india will not be applicable.

Full Judgment

1. The question to be considered in this case is whether the ratio of the decision of the Supreme Court in CCE, Kanpur v. Flock (India) Pvt.

Ltd. [2000 (120) E.L.T. 285 (S.C.) = 2000 (40) RLT 131 (S.C)] which arose in application under Rule 11 of erstwhile Central Excise Rules (present Section 11B) shall be applied to an application for refund under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. A similar issue was considered by us in our Final Order No. 423/2004-NB(A), dated 17-5-2004, 2. In the above mentioned case the appellant submitted that when contentions are raised by the assessee and an adjudication order is issued it will not be open for the assessee to challenge the adjudication order on the Bill of Entry merely by filing an application of refund. The position will be different when there is no Lis between the parties and it was only a mere assessment on the Bill of Entry. In the facts of the case it was submitted that there was a Lis between the parties. Therefore, we held that the application filed by the appellant therein for refund under Section 27 was only to be rejected by applying the ratio of the decision in Flock India. But we expressed no view on the contention taken by the appellant regarding mere assessment of Bill of Entry without a Lis involved.

3. In the present case also identical contentions are raised. It is submitted that there is Lis between the parties. Under these circumstances, we dismiss the appeal following our order, dated 17-5-2004. We make it clear that we are not expressing any view on the contention of the appellant that if it is only a mere assessment of Bill of Entry, the ratio of Flock India will not be applicable.

Same Court & Year Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delh... Same Parties Albert David Ltd. vs Commissioner of Customs Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge K Usha, S Kang, N T C.N.B.