Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2014 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (5) TMI 406 - AT - CustomsBar of Limitation - Entitlement for Refund of Duty Section 27 Customs Act, 1962 - Non-challenge of Orders finalizing provisional assessment Held that:- The orders finalizing provisional assessment have not been challenged at all and they have attained finality - In respect of the two orders wherein the authority who finalized the whole assessment has observed that the refund will be subject to Section 27 - Irrespective of the legal provisions, the orders became binding on the importer and as a result, rejection of refund claims on the ground that same are time-barred in accordance with Section 27 cannot be found fault with - The appeal filed by assessee in respect of into-bond Bills of Entry No. 1546 deal with in O-I-O No. 73/2006, dated 2-6-2006 holding eligibility of refund of Rs. 5,75,256/- and O-I-O No. 72/2006, dated 2-6-2006 finalizing Bills of Entry Nos. 204006, 204167, 204927, 205181, 205776, 205883, 206378, 206717, 207187, 207460, 207711, 209274 and 210446 involving refund of Rs. 44,45,425/- have to be held as final and in respect of these two refund claims, appeal is rejected and appellants are held to be ineligible for refund on the ground that the refund claims were filed beyond 6 months from the relevant date Decided against Assessees. Bar of Limitation - Entitlement for Refund of Duty Section 27 Customs Act, 1962 Held that:- Authority finalizing the provisional assessment did not specifically indicate that the refund is subject to Section 27 - Relying upon CC v. Indian Oil Corporation [2012 (1) TMI 31 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] - Prior to 18-4-2006 (the date on which Section 18 was amended) the importers were eligible for refund without filing a refund claim - The authority finalizing the provisional assessment was legally bound to refund the excess amount without any application from the importer - Rejection of these refund claims on the ground that they were time-barred cannot be sustained - The refund claims have to be decided in accordance with the provisions of Section 18 as it existed on the dates when the assessment was finalized in accordance with law - Therefore, refund claims dealt with remaining three orders viz. O-I-O No. 79/2006, dated 9-6-2006, No. 81/2006, dated 14-6-2006 and No. 27/2006, dated 5-4-2006 Matter remanded back to original adjudicating authority Decided in favour of assesse.
|