2017 (10) TMI 1073 - AT - Customs

Refund of excess CVD paid - rejection on the ground that the appellant has not challenged the assessment of the bill of entry - Held that - the non-filing of the appeal against the assessed bill of entry does not deprive the appellant to file its claim for refund under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 and which claim will fall under clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of Section 27 - appellant is entitled for the refund claim - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Refund claim rejection due to non-challenge of assessment of bill of entry.

Analysis:
The appellant appealed against the rejection of their refund claim for excess CVD payment, citing non-challenge of the bill of entry assessment as the reason for rejection. The Tribunal considered the settled issue based on a previous High Court ruling that confirmed the appellant had borne the duty in question. In a previous case involving the appellant, the Tribunal had observed that the absence of an assessment order to challenge did not bar the refund claim. The Tribunal referenced Section 27 of the Customs Act, emphasizing the right to claim a refund of duty paid or borne, regardless of the appeal status of the bill of entry assessment.

The Tribunal distinguished cases where an assessment order existed, stating that failure to appeal such orders precluded challenging them later for refund. However, in the absence of a contested assessment order, as in the present case, the Tribunal held that the appellant's refund claim was valid under Section 27 of the Customs Act. The Tribunal ruled that not filing an appeal against the assessed bill of entry did not negate the appellant's right to seek a refund under Section 27, falling under the provision's clause (ii) of sub-section (1).

Based on the precedent set in the appellant's earlier case, the Tribunal concluded that the appellant was entitled to the refund claim. Consequently, the impugned order rejecting the refund claim was overturned, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief. The Tribunal's decision underscored the importance of distinguishing cases based on the presence or absence of contested assessment orders when determining the validity of refund claims under the Customs Act.