2011 (10) TMI 84 - AT - Customs

Refund of excess amount of duty paid by the appellant on the transactions of High Sea Sale procurements. - Held that - there is no dispute that the assessments were completed between 01.6.2004 to 25.11.2004. If the assessments were completed on 25.11.2004, the appeals against the said assessments should have been preferred before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in time as per the statute. The statute authorises the first appellate authority to entertain the appeal if the same are filed within 60 days and extending the period by 30 more days, subject to condonation of delay. - Appeal filed beyond 30 days - Appeal filed by assessee rejected.

Summary

Issues involved:
Refund of excess duty paid on High Sea Sale procurements; Dismissal of appeals by Commissioner (Appeals) based on time bar.

Analysis:

Refund of Excess Duty Paid:
The appeals before the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad revolved around the issue of seeking a refund of excess duty paid by the appellant on transactions of High Sea Sale procurements. The appellant contended that the dismissal of refund claims by the Asst. Commissioner (Customs) was unjustified as it was based on the premise that the assessments had not been challenged. The appellant argued that the addition of High Seas Sales Charges in the assessable value without actual basis led to excess duty payment. The appellant highlighted the discrepancy between the notional charges applied by the Department and the actual charges incurred, emphasizing the guidelines issued by the CBEC regarding the same. Despite providing evidence of actual high sea charges, the assessing officer did not consider it, leading to the refund claims being rejected. The appellant, being a regular importer, maintained regular interactions with the assessing officer and expressed willingness to provide any additional information required for the refund claims. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal solely on the grounds of time bar, disregarding the merits of the case. The appellant sought a fair assessment of the issue on its merits, emphasizing the financial burden faced due to the excess duty payment under a mistake of law.

Dismissal Based on Time Bar:
The Appellate Tribunal, upon careful consideration of the written submissions, noted that the assessments in question were conducted between 01.6.2004 to 25.11.2004. As per statutory provisions, appeals against such assessments should have been filed within 60 days, extendable by a further 30 days subject to condonation of delay. However, in this case, the appeals were filed after a delay exceeding 90 days from the completion of assessments. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) to reject the appeals based on the time bar, stating that the impugned order was legally sound. Therefore, the Tribunal found no merits in the appeals filed by the assessee and proceeded to reject them.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Ahmedabad dismissed the appeals seeking a refund of excess duty paid on High Sea Sale procurements, upholding the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) based on the time bar for filing the appeals. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to statutory timelines for filing appeals and highlighted the legal implications of delays in seeking redressal for duty overpayments.