9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (4) TMI 1014 - AT - CustomsDenial of refund claim - Assessee not challenged the assessement order - Held that - Appellant paid the Education Cess by mistake. It is also noticed that in one case, the Appellant paid cess under protest. The present cases are covered by the decisions of the Hon ble High Court 2009 (9) TMI 41 - DELHI HIGH COURT and Tribunals 2013 (9) TMI 840 - CESTAT BANGALORE . - refund claim filed by the appellant under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 is maintainable. Accordingly, the impugned orders passed are set aside and the matter is remanded to the Adjudicating authority to decide the refund claims afresh on merit. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
Refund claim rejection based on failure to challenge assessment order. Analysis: The issues in these appeals revolve around the rejection of refund claims by the Adjudicating authority due to the failure of the Appellant to challenge the Assessment order. The Appellant mistakenly paid the Education Cess and subsequently filed refund claims, which were rejected. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the rejection citing the Appellant's failure to challenge the Assessment order as the ground for dismissal. Upon review, the Tribunal referred to a judgment by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in a similar case, emphasizing that the right to file a refund claim under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 is not deprived even if the appellant did not challenge the assessed Bill of Entry. The Tribunal also cited a case where an appeal by an importer was allowed in a comparable situation, highlighting that the absence of a dispute between the assessee and the Revenue does not hinder the claim of refund. The Tribunal found that the Appellant's payment of Education Cess by mistake falls within the purview of previous judicial decisions. Consequently, the Tribunal held that the refund claim filed by the Appellant under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 is maintainable. The impugned orders were set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Adjudicating authority for a fresh decision on the refund claims based on merit. Both appeals were allowed through remand, following the precedents established by the Hon'ble High Court and Tribunals in similar cases.
|
