2023 (10) TMI 1044 - AT - Customs

Rejection of refund claim - relevant date for claiming refund, is the date of the order of finalization of the provisional assessment, or not - HELD THAT - The Tribunal as has held that the order of finalization of the provisional assessment is the relevant date for the purpose of claiming refund. In the case of INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. VERSUS CC. (EXPORT), NEW DELHI 2014 (12) TMI 1047 - CESTAT NEW DELHI where it was held that date of service of finalization of provisional assessment is the relevant date for this purpose. There is merit in the argument of the appellants, the appeal is allowed.

Summary

Issues:
The appeal involves the rejection of a refund claim by Gail (India) Ltd based on the finalization of provisional assessment and the relevant date for claiming the refund.

Summary:
The appeal filed by Gail (India) Ltd challenges the rejection of their refund claim following the finalization of provisional assessment. The appellant argued that the limitation period for the refund claim should be calculated from the date of service of the final assessment order, not the date of finalization in the internal system. Citing precedents such as HINDUSTAN TIMES LTD. and INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD., the appellant contended that the date of service of the order is crucial for calculating the limitation period.

The respondent, however, argued that the appellant could have known about the finalization of assessment through the ICEGATE system, to which the appellant had access. The appellant countered by providing evidence of written communications from the revenue regarding the finalization of assessment on multiple occasions.

The Tribunal considered the arguments and referred to the case of INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. where it was observed that the date of service of the final assessment order is significant for claiming refunds related to provisional assessments completed before a certain date. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant's case aligns with the aforementioned decisions, emphasizing that the date of service of the finalization of provisional assessment is the relevant date for claiming the refund.

In light of the evidence presented by the appellant and the legal precedents cited, the Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument and allowed the appeal, directing the refund to be payable to Gail (India) Ltd.

Therefore, the Tribunal ruled in favor of Gail (India) Ltd, emphasizing the importance of the date of service of the final assessment order in determining the limitation period for claiming refunds related to finalized provisional assessments.