9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Refund of warehousing charges due to late decision or wrong decision of customs authorities. Analysis: The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, heard the appeal where the Commissioner (Appeals) had allowed the refund of warehousing charges paid by the respondent due to delays or errors made by the customs department. The Commissioner held that any amount collected by the department which is not rightfully due must be refunded, even in the absence of specific provisions in the Act. The Commissioner directed the original authorities to process the refund as per the Board's instructions. The Commissioner noted that the respondent had faced significant delays and hardships in the case since 1991, emphasizing the importance of timely decisions by the authorities. The department's appeal was based on the argument that there was no provision for refunding warehousing charges collected by the CWC. The respondent's counsel cited a Supreme Court decision in the case of Shipping Corpn. of India Ltd., where it was held that in the absence of any provision in the Customs Act, the customs authorities would be responsible for bearing demurrage charges if the carrier/custodian had the right to recover and the importer was not liable to pay. After considering the arguments and reviewing the records, the Tribunal found that if the respondent had to bear the warehousing charges due to delays or errors by the department, the Commissioner (Appeals) had correctly allowed the refund. The Tribunal did not find any illegality in the Commissioner's order and consequently dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue.
|
