2016 (9) TMI 314 - AT - Customs

Rejection of refund claim - refund of export duty - mild steel items - angles - channels - pipes - clearance from DTA to SEZ - duty paid under protest - withdrawal of protest and finalisation of assessment - Held that - It is a well settled position of law when a claim is preferred by an assessee before the Departmental Authority the same has to be processed within the scope of the legal provisions and the sanctioning authority cannot entertain any claim beyond the statutory time limit prescribed under the law. The decision in the case Mafatlal Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India 1996 (12) TMI 50 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA is held appropriate, where, it was decided that it is not open to any person to make a refund claim on the basis of a decision of a court or Tribunal rendered in the case of another person. Once the assessment of levy has become final the assessee cannot seek to reopen it nor can he claim refund without reopening such assessment, only on the basis of decision in another person s case - Section 72 of the Contract Act or for that matter Section 17 (1) (c) of the Limitation Act, 1963 has no application to such a claim for refund - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claim for export duty paid on mild steel items procured by the appellant; Time bar under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962; Entertainability of claim beyond statutory time limit; Legal position regarding refund claims based on court decisions in other cases.

Refund Claim for Export Duty:
The appellant, engaged in manufacturing pharmaceutical products in an SEZ, purchased mild steel items and paid export duty on them. A refund claim was filed for the duty paid, which was rejected by the Original Authority and upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant contended that the duty was not payable based on court decisions and sought a refund.

Time Bar under Section 27:
The appellant's claim for refund was contested on the grounds of being time-barred under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. The assessment of duty liability had been settled through an assessment order, and since no appeal was filed against it, the refund claim was deemed beyond the prescribed time limit.

Entertainability of Claim Beyond Statutory Time Limit:
The Tribunal examined the legal issues and held that the claim for refund was not entertainable due to the provisions of Section 26(c) read with Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal emphasized that statutory time limits must be adhered to, and a claim cannot be entertained beyond such limits, even if based on court decisions in other cases.

Legal Position Regarding Refund Claims Based on Court Decisions:
The Tribunal cited the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India, stating that a refund claim cannot be made solely based on a court or tribunal decision in another person's case. Once an assessment becomes final, the assessee cannot seek a refund without reopening the assessment, solely relying on decisions in unrelated cases. The Tribunal emphasized that legal provisions must be followed strictly in processing refund claims.

In conclusion, the Tribunal found no merit in the appellant's appeal and dismissed it, along with disposing of the Cross Objection. The judgment highlighted the importance of adhering to statutory time limits and legal provisions in processing refund claims, emphasizing that claims cannot be entertained solely based on court decisions in unrelated cases.