9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 884X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssue involved here is whether the Customs Officer posted in the Special Economic Zone unit has the power to sanction refund of customs duty or not. In Appeal No. C/10267/2013, the appellant filed refund of Customs duty of Rs. 2,79,924.21, due to reduction of Basic Customs duty (BCD) from 5% to 2.5% vide Notification No. 54/2010-Cus. dated 29.04.2010. In Appeal No. C/10268/2013, the appellant filed refund claim of Rs. 54,733.00, 4% SAD under Notification No. 104/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007. Both refund claims were rejected by the Specified Officer of Customs, Surat Special Economic Zone, vide Orders-in-Original dated 19.08.2011 and 29.07.2011. 3. Heard both sides. Learned Counsel for the appellant argued vehemently that the Customs duty has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a Exports vs. UOI (supra), the issue involved was examined by the Hon'ble High Court. Extracts of the relevant portions of the judgment are reproduced below :- 1. Short question which cannot wait indefinitely arises in this group of petitions. Though facts are slightly different in each case, the central question is as to which authority would be competent to entertain and dispose of the refund claims of units situated within the Special Economic Zones which claims arise out of over payments of customs duty, redemption fine or penalties under the Customs Act, 1962. As the facts would emerge, the respondents have brought about a situation where presently no authority is allowed to accept such refund claims. Neither the Commissioner (Cu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er to do so. By a mere letter, Ministry of Finance could not have suspended the power of Commissioner (Customs) to exercise his statutory functions. It is undisputed that duty was collected by the Commissioner of Customs. Whatever be the character of the duty, the Commissioner of Customs collected the same on a perceived opinion that unit concerned was required to pay such customs duty, redemption fine or penalties as the case may be. If later on such duty, fine or penalty is declared illegal, the person from whom the same has been collected would have a right to seek refund thereof. Such right would be covered by statutory provisions particularly, Section 27 contained in the Customs Act, 1962. Such refund application would have to be made ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd applications filed by the appellant have to be examined by the Customs Officer under the provisions of Customs Act and have to be disposed of on merits in accordance with the law. Therefore, these matters are required to be remanded to the proper officer of Customs at the SEZ for examining the refund claims filed by the appellant and take action as per law. Needless to say that the appellant should be given reasonable opportunity for being heard. 7. At this stage, learned Counsel makes a mention that the issue is quite old and a direction may be given for early disposal by the proper officer. As the matter has been delayed on procedural wrangles, it would be proper to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible. Therefore, the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
