Raju ORDER
Raju, Member (T)
1. This appeal has been filed by M/s. China Steel Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. against denial of refund of Extra Duty Deposit paid by them in terms of CBEC Circular No. 11/2001 : MANU/CUCR/0051/2001 relating to cases handled by Special Valuation Branch of the customs house.
1.1. The appellant was engaged in import of 'Silicon Electrical Steel of Cold Rolled Full Hard (unannealed)' from M/s. China Steel Corporation India Pvt. Ltd. Since the goods were imported from a related entity, the issue of valuation was taken up by Special Valuation Branch (SVB) in terms of Circular No. 11/2001-Cus : MANU/CUCR/0051/2001 dated 23.02.2001. The aforesaid circular was an amendment to the earlier circular 1/1998 dated 01.01.1998, the said circular was related to procedure regarding cases handled by Special Valuation Branch of the Custom House. The aforesaid circulars provided for assessment of certain type of cases to be examined by Special Valuation Branch of the custom houses. During the pendency of the investigation, the aforesaid circulars provided for 1% Extra Duty Deposit as a safeguard for revenue.
1.2. In the instant case, the appellant had imported the goods from related entity in Taiwan. The matter was referred to Special Valuation Branch and during pendency of the investigation the appellant deposited 1% Extra Duty Deposit. The assessment was finally approved at the declared assessable value vide F. No. S/9-66/GATT/2014 GVC dated 04.02.2016 and therefore, the Extra Duty Deposit paid by the appellant became refundable to them. The aforesaid circular also prescribes that during pendency of investigation by SVB, assessment would be done on provisional basis. In the instant case, since the decision of the Special Valuation Branch came in favor of the appellant and the price declared by the appellant was accepted by the revenue the amount of Extra Duty Deposit paid by the appellant became refundable to them. Since the order accepting the declared value was passed on 04.02.2016 and refund claim was filed on 24.01.2018, a show cause notice dated 13.03.2018 was issued seeking to reject refund claim on the grounds of limitation. The said show cause notice contained Table-B which indicated the bill wise date of final assessment which ranged from 24.09.2016 to 06.01.2016. Since the claim was filed on 24.01.2018 and the assessment was finalized during the pendency 24.09.2016 to 06.01.2016, it was alleged that the claim filed by the appellant is barred by limitation.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the impugned order is non-speaking and passed without application of mind. He argued that the 1% EDD, paid by the appellant as per Circular No. 11/2001-Cus : MANU/CUCR/0051/2001 during the provisional assessment of the bills of entries, is only a security deposit and not a payment of duty. He argued that since it is not a payment of duty, provision of Section 27 will not apply to the refund claim filed by the appellant. Learned counsel argued that Section 27........