Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2021 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (12) TMI 917 - AT - CustomsRefund claim of Special Additional Duty (SAD), which is in lieu of sales tax - rejection on the ground of time limitation - HELD THAT:- The facts are not in dispute and admittedly, the appellant importer has filed refund claim after more than one year or may be by few days more from the date of payment of SAD. The condition of limitation was not a part of the original notification. It was only with the introduction of Circular No. 6/2008-Cus. and subsequent amending Notification No.93/2008 dated 01.08.2008, the department started insisting on the limitation period (of one year) as prescribed, with effect from 1.8.2008, became applicable. The Hon’ble High Court in SONY INDIA PVT. LTD. VERSUS THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS [2014 (4) TMI 870 - DELHI HIGH COURT] has clearly held that the expression “so far as may be” used in the sub-section (6) of Section 3 of CTA, has to be followed to the extent possible. Merely because Section 27 of the Customs Act provides for a period of limitation for filing refund claim, it cannot be held that even for the purposes of claiming refund in terms of the Notification, the same limitation has to be applied. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court has also held that in the matters which deal with substantive rights, such as imposition of penalties and other provisions, that adversely affect statutory rights, the parent enactment must clearly impose such obligations; subordinate legislation or Rules cannot prevail, or be made in such case. The appeal filed by the appellant is allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|