2012 (12) TMI 384 - AT - Customs

Refund claim rejection of refund claim on the ground that while filing the Bill of Entry the appellant did not mention the exemption under Notification No.21/2002-CE dated 01/03/2002 - Held that - It is the duty of the Customs Officer while assessing the bill of entry to assess in accordance with the law - there is an obligation on the part of the department to extent exemption given by an unconditional exemption notification and the same could not be refused because the appellant has omitted to claim that relief

Summary

Issues:
Refund claim rejection based on non-mention of exemption in Bill of Entry, appellant's entitlement to benefit of Notification No. 21/2002-CE, reliance on previous decisions, dismissal of refund claim by lower authorities, applicability of Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962, lack of appearance by appellant, Tribunal's decision based on previous cases.

Analysis:
The appellant filed an appeal against the rejection of their refund claim amounting to Rs.89,953/- due to non-mention of exemption in the Bill of Entry. The appellant imported goods under Chapter Heading 28 of the Customs Tariff, chargeable to duty @ 7.5% as per an exemption notification. The assessing officer did not consider the appellant's entitlement to the exemption, leading to the duty assessment. The appellant subsequently filed a refund claim, citing an omission by the assessing officer and relying on previous decisions. The lower authorities dismissed the claim, citing non-challenge of the assessment. The Tribunal noted the issue's narrow scope and proceeded with disposal despite the appellant's absence.

The Tribunal considered the appellant's contentions and referenced a previous case involving Sesa Goa Ltd. The Tribunal emphasized the Customs Officer's duty to assess in accordance with the law and rectify accidental slips or omissions under Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962. Citing the obligation to extend unconditional exemption benefits, the Tribunal differentiated the present case from previous decisions like Priya Blue Industries. The Tribunal highlighted the need to correct assessment errors without challenging the assessment itself, referencing relevant legal precedents.

Relying on the decisions in Shree Hari Chemicals and Sesa Goa Ltd., the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal with consequential relief. The Tribunal emphasized the obligation of Customs Officers to apply unconditional exemption notifications and rectify accidental omissions in assessments, thereby granting relief to the appellant based on legal principles and precedents.