Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2006 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2006 (6) TMI 283 - AT - CustomsRefund of excess Customs duty paid - denial of refund on the ground that the assessments of the Bills of Entry had not been challenged - HELD THAT:- Amendment of Bill of Entry is permissible on the basis of documentary evidence which was in existence at the time when the goods were cleared. In the present case, when the goods were cleared, Customs Notification 21/2002 (un-amended) was in existence. As its amendment through corrigendum was retrospective in effect, the amended Notification should be deemed to have been in existence at the time of clearance of the goods and, consequently, in terms of Section 149, the subject Bills of Entry were open to be amended. It appears from the provisions of Section 149 that such amendment shall be made by the importer as authorised by the proper officer. Thus the importer is expected to apply to the proper officer for permission to amend the Bills of Entry. Such amendment of the Bills of Entry should precede re-assessment under Section 17 of the Act. Therefore, it would appear that the initiative for re-assessment should come from the assessee. It is still open to the assessee to take this initiative, there being no period of limitation prescribed for re-assessment under the Act. Hence, for the ends of justice, the impugned order is set aside and the original authority is directed to reassess the Bills of Entry under Section 17(4) of the Act after allowing the assessee to amend the Bills of Entry under Section 149. The authority shall thereafter proceed to entertain the refund claims already filed by the party. Of course, the assessee, in that event, will have to discharge is burden of proof against the bar of unjust enrichment. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
|