Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2013 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (7) TMI 797 - HC - CustomsExtended period of limitation - relevant date - Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the demand notice dated 1.12.2000 was time barred - the said notice was in time in pursuance of the provisions of Sections 28 and 153 of the Customs Act, 1962 and Sections 8, 9 and 27 of the General Clauses Act - Held that:- The six months period of limitation has to be calculated from the relevant date. - The 'relevant date' is defined in Section 28(3) of the Customs Act as the date on which the proper officer makes an order for the clearance of the goods or in any other case the date of payment of duty or interest. Given the fact that the payment of duty on the above bill of entry was on 1.6.2000 and going by Section 28 of the Customs Act, the six months time for the purpose of invoking jurisdiction under Section 28 has to be counted from the date of payment of duty i.e. on 1.6.2000. - Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that the proceedings initiated by the adjudicating authority was time barred. When the Revenue had accepted the two other bills of entry we fail to understand the logic in challenging the order of the Tribunal in respect of one bill of entry which was the subject matter in one of the appeals before the Tribunal – court relied AMBALI KARTHIKEYAN v. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE (1970 (10) TMI 29 - HIGH COURT OF KERALA) wherein it was decided that the notice was served within time limit - similar contention taken in respect of other two bills of entry were not under challenge before the Court – appeal decided against the revenue.
|