9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 1483 - AT - CustomsRefund of SAD - N/N. 102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007 - Time limitation - whether there is any time limit prescribed by law for filing the refund claim of additional duty of Customs as stands exempted vide the N/N. 102/2007? Held that - No doubt, the said Notification is silent about any time period for filing the said claim. But the Notification exempts the goods in first schedule of Customs Tariff Act from being leviable to the additional duty of Customs. However, the Notification itself mandates the deposit of the said additional duty at the time of importation of the goods and thereafter to get the refund. From this perusal, one thing becomes abundantly clear that the importer has the knowledge of his entitlement to file the refund of additional duty of Customs at the time of the payment of said duty itself i.e. at the time, the product being in first schedule (under the exempted category) is imported - for claiming the refund of additional duty nothing else has to happen or to be done by the asseesse after the payment of said additional duty of Customs. The refund claim of additional duty due to the exemption flowing out of N/N. 102/2007 has to be filed within one year in view of the subsequent N/N. 93/2008-Cus which still holds good and also in view of Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of Revenue.
Issues Involved:
1. Whether there is a time limit prescribed by law for filing the refund claim of additional duty of Customs as exempted by Notification No. 102/2007. 2. Whether the amendment introduced by Notification No. 93/2008, which prescribes a one-year time limit for filing refund claims, is valid and enforceable. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Time Limit for Filing Refund Claim: The primary issue revolves around whether there is a statutory time limit for filing a refund claim for the special additional duty (SAD) of Customs as per Notification No. 102/2007. The relevant facts indicate that the assessee filed a refund claim under the special refund mechanism provided by the said Notification for an amount of ?3,48,624/-. The Assistant Commissioner rejected the claim on the grounds that it was filed after the prescribed time limit of one year from the date of payment, as per Notification No. 93/2008. The Commissioner (Appeals) overruled this, stating that no period of limitation is prescribed under Section 3(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and thus allowed the refund claim. 2. Validity and Enforceability of Notification No. 93/2008: The second issue pertains to the validity of the amendment introduced by Notification No. 93/2008, which prescribes a one-year time limit for filing refund claims. The Department argued that the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in allowing the refund claim despite the clear stipulation of the one-year period in Notification No. 93/2008. The Tribunal examined whether this amendment, which introduces a time limit for filing refund claims, is enforceable. It was noted that the amending Notification No. 93/2008 is rooted in the statute, specifically Section 25(2A) of the Customs Act, 1962, and thus holds statutory backing. Tribunal's Findings: The Tribunal concluded that the refund claim for the additional duty of Customs must be filed within one year, as stipulated by Notification No. 93/2008. The Tribunal emphasized that the Customs Act itself, under Section 27, prescribes a one-year period for claiming refunds of any duty or interest. This statutory provision aligns with the amended Notification No. 93/2008, which was introduced to provide clarity on the time limit for filing such refund claims. Legal Precedents and Principles: The Tribunal referenced several legal principles and precedents to support its decision. It highlighted that an exemption notification must be strictly construed, and if the person claiming the exemption does not fall within the letter of the Notification, they cannot claim the exemption. The Tribunal also cited the Hon’ble Supreme Court's decision in Commissioner of Customs (Import Mumbai) Vs. M/s Dilip Kumar & Co., which emphasized that statutory provisions must be followed strictly, and courts cannot extend the limitation period by invoking provisions of the Limitation Act. Conclusion: The Tribunal set aside the Order of the Commissioner (Appeals), holding that the refund claim must be filed within one year as per Notification No. 93/2008 and Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal allowed the Department's appeal and rejected the refund claim filed by the assessee. The decision underscores the importance of adhering to statutory provisions and the stipulated time limits for filing refund claims.
|
