9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (5) TMI 124X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... examined it was found that they had nothing to do with the respondent herein and the goods themselves were found to be a different variety from the one specified in the Bill of Entry. The respondent at this stage purported to have abandoned the goods under Sec. 23 of the Customs Act,1962. Since the respondent had already paid duty under the prior entry system, the respondent filed a refund application, unfortunately after the expiry of the six months period from the date of payment of duty and the refund claim of the respondent was rejected by the original authority as time-barred and an appeal having been filed before the lower appellate authority, the lower appellate authority under the impugned order held that Sec. 27 is not applicable a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion it should be deemed to be a wrong payment or a deposit which the Department, on consideration of fairplay, justice and equity, is bound to refund and no provision of the Customs Act, 1962 would have any application. The Learned Counsel submitted that Sec. 12 of the Act is a charging Section and the question of charging to duty would arise only when the goods arrived and when the respondent indisputably does not have any title or claim or right to the goods at all, the question of levy of duty would hardly arise. 4. I have carefully considered the submissions made before me. The fact of the case indeed gives rise interesting questions of law. The lower appellate authority has found in the impugned order that the respondent had abandon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, though styled as duty is notduty but mistakenly paid amount, then de hors the provisions of the Act, it is open to the respondent to seek relief administratively from the authorities for the amount on the ground that the respondent paid a certain amount which is neither duty nor any amount payable under the Customs Act and the departmental authorities also collected the same from the respondent under a mistake when the respondent did not import any goods. In such a situation the question of the respondent inviting an order from the original authority and more so preferring an appeal before the lower appellate authority would hardly arise and in such a situation the very order of the lower appellate authority as well as the order of the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
