2024 (9) TMI 1669 - HC - Customs

Time limitation for filing refund - Interpretation of time limit for refund claim under Customs Act, 1962 based on provisional assessment and final assessment - time limit of one year from the date of payment of duty prescribed under N/N. 102/2007-Custom dated 14.09.2007 read with N/N. 93/2008 Customs dated 01.08.2008 for the refund claim filed in terms of the said notification, can be considered from the date of finalisation of provisional assessment (in cases where the assessment is provisional) or otherwise - whether the refund filed in the instant case is well within the time as prescribed under N/N. 102/2007-Cus and refund is not time barred? HELD THAT - This Court in PIONEER INDIA ELECTRONICS (P) LTD. VERSUS UNION OF INDIA ANOTHER 2013 (9) TMI 705 - DELHI HIGH COURT has held that 'We are in complete agreement with the aforesaid observations of the Delhi High Court which is followed by the Tribunal to the effect that the date of making the refund application would be required to be considered from the date of final assessment and not from the date of payment of provisional duty as per the provisions of Section 27(1B)(c) of the Act and the reliance placed by the Revenue on the interpretations of the impugned Notification No.93/2008 cannot be applied contrary to the statutory provisions.' Thus, no question of law would arise from the impugned common order of the CESTAT and therefore, this appeals are accordingly dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Interpretation of time limit for refund claim under Customs Act, 1962 based on provisional assessment and final assessment.

Analysis:
The High Court considered an appeal filed under section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, addressing common questions of law arising from a previous order by the Custom Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The primary issues revolved around the time limit for refund claims under Notification No. 102/2007-Custom and Noti. No. 93/2008 Customs. The first issue questioned whether the one-year time limit for refund claims should be calculated from the date of finalization of provisional assessment or otherwise. The second issue pertained to the correctness of the Tribunal's decision regarding the timeliness of the refund claim under the mentioned notifications.

In a previous Tax Appeal, the Court had dismissed a similar issue, stating that no question of law arose from the CESTAT's order. The Court referred to Section 27(1B)(c) of the Act to determine the starting point for the one-year limitation period for refund claims, emphasizing that the limitation begins from the date of adjustment of duty after the final assessment in cases of provisional assessment. The Court highlighted that the Tribunal's interpretation aligned with statutory provisions and rejected the Revenue's reliance on the impugned Notification No. 93/2008.

The Court also cited the decision of the Delhi High Court in a related case, emphasizing that the date of making the refund application should be considered from the date of final assessment, not the date of payment of provisional duty. The Court agreed with the Delhi High Court's interpretation, emphasizing that the Revenue's reliance on the impugned Notification was contrary to statutory provisions. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeals, concluding that no question of law arose from the CESTAT's order.

Overall, the judgment clarified the interpretation of the time limit for refund claims under the Customs Act, highlighting the significance of final assessment in determining the starting point for the limitation period. The Court's analysis focused on harmonizing statutory provisions with the application of relevant notifications, emphasizing the need to adhere to the prescribed timelines for refund claims under the Customs Act, 1962.