TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2263X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... – 2nd Respondent directed to send application to Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Air Cargo) and petitioner shall also submit application himself along with copy of order within two weeks failing which respondent can pass appropriate orders – Decided conditionally in favour of assessee. - W. P. Nos. 28331 to 28333 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 21-9-2015 - R. Mahadevan , J. For the Appellant : Mr. B Satish Sundar For the Respondent : Mr. Vikram Ramakrishnan ORDER The petitioner has come forward with these writ petitions challenging the orders of the second respondent dated 12.3.2015, 29.4.2015 and 18.12.2014 and to direct the respondents herein to disburse the refund amount with interest at appropriate rates. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner, they are eligible to claim refund of the said amount from the respondent vide notification dated 14.09.2007. In view of the same, the petitioner made applications dated 15.04.2014, 28.12.2013 and 04.07.2014 respectively for refund of the said amount, which were also taken on file by the 2nd respondent. However, the 2nd respondent, on scrutinizing the same, for want of jurisdiction rejected the claim of the petitioner by the impugned orders dated 12.03.2015, 29.04.2015 and 18.12.2014. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner is before this Court. 3.1 According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, both the authorities i.e., Assistant Commissioner of Customs House and Air Cargo Complex have concurrent jurisdiction over the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ied in terms of the jurisdiction of Commissioners of Customs (Airport Air Cargo), Port (Import) and Port (Export) at Chennai. Under Col.3, the jurisdictions of these Commissioners have been specified to be inclusive of the Port of Chennai, Port of Ennore as well as Chennai Airport etc. From the above, it is very clear that the Commissioners of Customs in Chennai and their AC/DC of Customs have concurrent jurisdiction over the ports as well as the airport. Hence, it cannot be said that the main refund application was filed before the AC/DC of customs, who did not have jurisdiction over the Airport and Air Cargo Complex. It would, of course, have been expedient if the appellants have filed the refund claim before the DC/AC at the Air Cargo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and perused the materials available on record. 6. Admittedly, the refund applications were filed by the petitioners belatedly. However, this court is of the view that the delay is not on the higher side. Hence, the impugned orders dated 12.3.2015, 29.4.2015 18.12.2014, are liable to be set aside and accordingly, the same are set aside and the second respondent is directed to send the original refund applications submitted by the petitioner to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Air Cargo). The petitioner is also permitted to submit the copy of the refund applications to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Air Cargo) along with the copy of this order, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
