Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2021 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (6) TMI 747 - AT - CustomsRefund of the excess payment made - rejection on the ground that the payment towards two bills of entry fall under the jurisdiction of ACC, Bangalore as the imports were made from ACC, Bangalore in respect of two said bills of entry - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that the appellant has made payment twice on account of the technical problem in ICEGATE and the fact of double payment was also confirmed from PAO, New Delhi which confirms double payment towards certain bills of entry for which the refund was filed. Further, the refund application was filed with the ICD, Bangalore which has partly allowed the refund but rejected the refund of ₹ 10,49,491/- on the ground that the payment towards two bills of entry fall under the jurisdiction of ACC, Bangalore as the imports were made from ACC, Bangalore. In the additional submissions filed by the appellant, the appellant has also submitted that the bills of entry with reference to which the amounts have been paid twice were provisionally assessed during the relevant point of time due to pendency of SVB proceedings and those bills of entry were finally assessed by closure of provisional duty Bond by ACC, Bangalore in 2019 and communicated to the appellant on 04.01.2019 and has also submitted the documentary proof of final assessment of the said bill of entry and as per Section 27(1B)(c) where any duty is paid provisionally under Section 18, the limitation of one year shall be computed from the date of assessment of duty after the final assessment. If the Department consider the same as duty even then the period of one year will start from 04.01.2019 and the refund filed by the appellant is found to be within time. The impugned order rejecting the refund on time bar is not sustainable in law - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|