2009 (2) TMI 328

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s from the date of payment of duty and not from the date of rectification. We find it difficult to accept this contention. Till the assessment order is rectified, the question of refund would not arise at all. In the present case, the assessment order was rectified on 13-12-2001 pursuant to the order of the Supreme Court dated 13-3-2001. In the present case, the refund claim was made even prior to .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ts submits that the real issue here is that, apparently as a result of a clerical error, countervailing duty was charged at the rate of fifty per cent instead of five per cent. He submits that the appellants will make an application for rectification of the error under Section 154 of the Customs Act and that the application may be considered by the authorities in law. This is recorded. The civil .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... is contended that the tribunal erred in holding that the claim is not time-barred. It is contended that the limitation runs from the date of payment of duty and not from the date of rectification. We find it difficult to accept this contention. Till the assessment order is rectified, the question of refund would not arise at all. In the present case, the assessment order was rectified on 13-12-20 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X