9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 406X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER In the impugned order, the issue identified by the Commissioner (Appeals) and the facts are as under :- "The issue for determination in this case is whether the limitation of time prescribed under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 would be applicable to refund claims arising on account of finalization of provisional assessment under Section 18. Out of 10 re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e importer is entitled for refund of the above amount subject to its complying with the provisions of Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962". This is found only in two orders viz. Order No. 72/2006, dated 2-6-2006 and No. 73/2006, dated 2-6-2006. In the other three orders, the order simply states that after finalisation of assessment, excess levy of a specified amount has been found. 4. We fin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Nos. 204006, 204167, 204927, 205181, 205776, 205883, 206378, 206717, 207187, 207460, 207711, 209274 and 210446 involving refund of Rs. 44,45,425/- have to be held as final and in respect of these two refund claims, the appeal is rejected and appellants are held to be ineligible for refund on the ground that the refund claims were filed beyond 6 months from the relevant date. 5. Coming to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he excess amount without any application from the importer. Learned AR is unable to produce any decision taking a contrary view. Since the issue is squarely covered by decisions of the Hon'ble High Courts, the rejection of these refund claims on the ground that they were time-barred cannot be sustained. The refund claims have to be decided in accordance with the provisions of Section 18 as it exis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
