Page 22 - ELT_1st July 2020_Vol 373_Part 1

xx EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373
bona fide action taken in discharge of their duties under the Customs
Act, 1962 - Acts of petitioners/accused persons alleged to have been
committed in discharge of their official duties which they were required
to do as per the order issued by Customs Authority to find out fake
Indian currency Notes - Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), West
Bengal refused to grant sanction for prosecution and opined that
petitioners being Customs officers, entitled to get protection under
Section 155 read with Section 106 of Customs Act, 1962 - Court debarred
from taking cognizance of offence in view of sub-section (i) of Section 197
of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Accordingly, Criminal proceedings
under Sections 384, 411 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 pending before
the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Murshidabad, are
hereby quashed — Nitai Chandra Das v. State of West Bengal (Cal.) ........... 34
Protest - Duty paid in anticipation of Ad-hoc exemption under
consideration, deemed to be under protest, limitation for refund not
applicable - See under REFUND/REFUND CLAIM ................ 3
Provisional assessment - Assessment provisional for all purposes - Section
18 of Customs Act, 1962 — Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata v. Narsingh
Ispat Limited (Tri. - Kolkata) ............................... 118
Qualification to take written examination for obtaining Customs Broker
Licence - See under CUSTOMS BROKERS LICENCE .............. 30
Rectification of mistake in Settlement Commission order, scope of - See
under SETTLEMENT COMMISSION ....................... 27
— Refund of credit accumulated due to closure of factory denied - Credit
having accumulated because of failure of appellant to add sufficient
value through manufacture and appellant being an end user to that
extent excluded from entitlement for refund - Grant of refund would,
therefore, be tantamount to acknowledging incorrect application of rate
of duty on the manufacturer preceding the applicant in the value added
chain - Various decisions relied on by appellant alleged to be not
considered but outcome not varied even after considering such decisions
- Error not being apparent on face of Tribunal’s order, not rectifiable -
Section 35C(2) of Central Excise Act, 1944 — Shree Ambe Mata Industries v.
Commissioner of C. Ex. & Cus., Aurangabad (Tri. - Mumbai) ................. 130
Reference to Larger Bench is not a matter of right - See under APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL’S ORDER ................................ 130
REFUND/REFUND CLAIM :
— Amount deposited during course of investigation - Assessee claiming
amount deposited during course of investigation from their own account
under duress - Order-in-Original dated 18-4-2001 allowing refund of any
amount paid by assessee on their own account but not payment made on
account of importer - HELD : Assessee’s letter to DRI specifically
mentioning that amount paid voluntarily towards payment of duties for
import made by against High Sea Purchases made from assessee -
Although balance-sheets showing amount in Assets side against heading
deposited with Customs, payment of amount on assessee’s account
cannot be established - Assessee vehemently arguing that aforesaid
amount paid from their own account, but wordings of order dated
18-4-2001 are ‘on their own account’ and there is big difference between
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st July 2020  22