2005 (5) TMI 531

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . [Order]. - In this appeal which has been filed by the appellants against the impugned order-in-appeal, the issue relates to the refund of duty to the appellants. 2. The facts are not much in dispute. The appellants imported one consignment of cosmetic goods. They filed Bill of Entry dated 11-4-2000 for the clearance of those goods. The competent authority assessed the customs duty payab .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ntention of the ld. Counsel is that the title to the goods could be relinquished under Section 23 of the Customs Act, by the appellants at any time, before passing of the order under Section 47 of the Act, therefore, their refund claim could not be rejected. But in my view, this contention of the Counsel is misconceived. The order assessing the customs duty payable on the goods and fixing the rede .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ayment of duty, but was not so filed. The duty was deposited by them on 15-4-2000, whereas the refund claim was submitted by them on 28-5-2003 much after the expiry of prescribed period. Therefore, the refund claim deserves rejection on this ground also. 6. Consequently, the impugned order is upheld and the appeal of the appellants is dismissed. (Order dictated in the open Court)
Case l .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X