9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Duty paid on short landed goods. 2. Refund of duty paid for the second time. 3. Time limitation for claiming duty refund. Detailed Analysis: 1. The petitioners imported Cold Rolled Steel Sheets from the Federal Republic of Germany, but 36 out of the 41 bundles were short landed and over carried to Madras. Upon bringing back the 36 bundles to Bombay, the respondents demanded duty payment for the second time, despite the petitioners having already paid duty for the full 41 bundles earlier. The petitioners paid the demanded duty of Rs. 1,44,545.45 to clear the goods. Subsequently, they applied for a refund of the duty paid on the 36 bundles, which was rejected by the Assistant Collector citing time limitation as the reason. 2. The department's stance was that the duty refund should be calculated based on the earlier payment made for the full 41 bundles. However, it was argued that the duty paid for the second time, without legal authority, should be refunded. The Assistant Collector and the appellate authority rejected the refund claim based on the claim being time-barred. The court emphasized that since there was no second import of the bundles, demanding duty again was unjustified and without legal authority. Reference was made to a judgment by Justice Bharucha in a similar case, where refusal to permit clearance without payment of duty anew was deemed unjustified. 3. The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, ordering the refund of the duty paid for the second time. The court held that the duty paid for the second time was to be refunded as it was collected without legal authority. Interest at the rate of 15% per annum was also ordered to be paid by the respondents from the date of collection till the refund. The court made it clear that in such cases where duty is collected without legal authority, there is no question of limitation. The petitioners were granted relief, and no costs were imposed in the circumstances of the case.
|
