H.K. Thakur, Member (T) - (1.) THESE appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the orders passed by the first appellate authority under which the orders passed by the adjudicating authorities have been upheld. Adjudicating authorities in the adjudicating proceedings observed that all the respondents have fulfilled the conditions of Notification No. dated 14 -9 -2007 and accordingly sanctioned refunds of 4% Additional Customs Duty by way of credit notes in the respective License/Scrip of the importers. Revenue has filed these appeals on the grounds that as per C.B.E. & C. Circular Nos. dated 13 -8 -2010, dated 29 -3 -2012, 18/2013 -Cus., dated 24 -9 -2013 and DGFT Public Notice, the time limit for using re -credited DEPB scrips in the case of 4% SAD was extended upto 30 -9 -2013. It was also directed that all applications of 4% SAD paid through DEPB/reward script should be disposed of by officers by 30 -6 -2013. Shri G.P. Thomas (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that DEPB Scrips could not be used after 30 -9 -2013 for discharging SAD liability out of re -credited DEPB scrips. It was his case that in view of the C.B.E. & C. Circulars and DGFT trade notice, orders passed by first appellate authority and adjudicating authority should be set -aside.
(2.) ALL the appellants filed cross -objections in favour of the O -I -A passed by the first appellate authority. Shri Vipul Khandar (Chartered Accountant) appearing on behalf of the respondents argued that all the refund claims were filed before 30 -6 -2013 and all the conditions specified under Notification No. dated 14 -9 -2007 have been fulfilled. That instructions issued by way of circulars cannot take away the right of the respondents to claim refund under exemption notification. Heard both sides and perused the case records. The issue involved in these appeals/cross objections is whether sanctioning of 4% of SAD refunds by way of re -credit in the respective licenses after 30 -6 -2013 was proper or not. It is observed from the case records that utilisation of re -credited amounts was permitted/revalidated by C.B.E. & C. Circulars till 30 -6 -2013 which was further extended up to 30 -9 -2013. In Para 7.6 of the orders dated 20 -1 -2014 passed by the first appellate authority it is factually stated that the re -credits were given well before 30 -9 -2013. It has not been brought on record by the Revenue that re -credit was allowed by the adjudicating authorities after 30 -9 -2013. It is also seen that there is no condition under Notification No. that SAD duty should be initially paid through cash. It has been correctly agitated by the respondents in the cross objections that a right given under an exemption notification cannot be taken away by the issue of Departmental Circulars. In view of the above observations orders passed by the first appellate authority are legally correct and are not required to be interfered with. Appeals filed by the Revenue are rejected and cross -objections filed by the respondents are allowed. ;