Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2014 (9) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (9) TMI 378 - HC - CustomsCondonation of delay in filing writ petition - Rejection of refund of duty or drawback - fixation of brand rate - period of limitation - Sections 74 or 75 of the Customs Act, 1962 - export of 40 units of ultrasound scanners - Senior Analyst (DBK) referring to the letter of the petitioner dated 20-11-1992 informed the petitioner that its case had been reconsidered and found that the petitioner had not filed any application in the prescribed proforma enclosing the DBK statements and the export documents for fixation of brand rate within the time period prescribed under Rule 6(1) of Drawback Rules, 1971. Accordingly the petitioner was informed that the case had been once again rejected as time-barred. Held that:- In the present case there is no explanation forthcoming from the petitioner for the inordinate delay of about five years in approaching this Court. The only explanation is that the petitioners had been writing letters/representations. - The petitioner as far back as on 15-9-1991 was informed about the rejection of the claim of the petitioner which was then reiterated vide letters dated 4-6-1992 and 24-3-1993. Despite the rejection of the case of the petitioner, then chose to sit over the matter and let considerable time run by. The explanation that the petitioner was making representation is not an explanation which can be considered as a sufficient explanation for this inordinate delay of about five years in approaching this Court. In the normal course of things limitation to file a suit for recovery or to agitate a claim against the Government for refund of any amount wrongfully claimed or paid would be three years. - writ petition dismissed - Decided against the assessee.
|