9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Refund of countervailing duty paid under a mistake of law. 2. Applicability of limitation period for filing a refund claim. 3. Obligation of the Department to refund excess duty collected without authority of law. Detailed Analysis: 1. The appellant, a company engaged in manufacturing power cables and A.C.S.R. Conductors, imported electrolytic aluminum rods between 1962 and 1965 and paid countervailing duty amounting to Rs. 3,72,863.04. Subsequently, it was discovered that the duty had been paid under a mistake of law, as per a judgment of the Gujarat High Court in March 1972. The appellant applied for a refund in April 1974, followed by a writ petition in December 1974 seeking refund of the duty. The Assistant Collector rejected the refund claim as time-barred under the Customs Act, 1962. 2. The key argument by the appellant's counsel was that the duty was paid under a genuine belief of its liability and that the mistake was realized only after the Gujarat High Court judgment. On the other hand, the respondent's counsel contended that the appellant should have been aware of a Public Notice issued in October 1967 exempting such rods from duty, implying that the claim was time-barred. The Court analyzed the timeline of events and emphasized that the appellant could not have known about the Public Notice until it was referenced in the Gujarat High Court judgment. 3. The Court referred to precedents and established legal principles to determine the starting point of limitation for filing a refund claim in cases of mistaken payment of duty. It was held that the limitation period began from the date of the Gujarat High Court judgment in March 1972, within which the appellant filed the writ petition in December 1974, well within the prescribed time frame. The Court reiterated the obligation of the Department to refund duty collected without authority of law, citing relevant case laws to support the decision. In conclusion, the High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Single Judge's order and directing the Department to calculate and refund the countervailing duty paid by the appellant between 1962-1965 within a specified timeline. The Court also ordered the respondents to bear the costs of the appeal.
|
