9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 610X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ms Act are not applicable, the contentions, now raised by the learned counsel for the respondents, cannot be accepted. Therefore, the third respondent is liable to refund the amount excessively paid to the petitioner and the impugned order is set aside. - Decided in favour of petitioner - W.P.No.29830 of 2015, M.P Nos.1 and 2 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 7-3-2016 - M. Duraiswamy, J. For the Petitioner : Mr. N. Balaji For the Respondents : Mr. A. P. Srinivas, Standing Counsel ORDER The petitioners have filed the above writ petition to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in and connected with Order in Appeal No.C.Cus.II No.504/2015 dated 29.05.2015, passed by the second respondent herein upholding th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere corresponding with the respondents for getting refund of the said sum of ₹ 1,92,760/- 4. The petitioners also enclosed the correspondences between the petitioners and the respondents from 16.05.2012 to 25.11.2014. Thereafter, since the respondents did not refund the excess amount, the petitioners filed an application before the third respondent. The third respondent rejected the application, stating that the application had been filed after a period of one year, as contemplated under Sec.27 of the Customs Act. Aggrieved over the order passed by the third respondent, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the second respondent and the second respondent, by his Order dated 29.5.2015, has stated that Sec.27 of the Customs Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1,92,760/- and the amount is lying with the third respondent and the third respondent cannot hold the amount without any reason. 8. Mr.A.P. Srinivas, learned Standing Counsel, appearing for the respondents, submitted that the petitioner can only file an application before the CESTAT under Sec.129-A of the Customs Act, 1962. 9. Since the third respondent is withholding the amount, excessively paid by the petitioners and when the second respondent himself has stated that the provisions of Sec.27 of the Customs Act are not applicable, the contentions, now raised by the learned counsel for the respondents, cannot be accepted. 10. In these circumstances, I am of the considered view that the third respondent is liable to refund a sum of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
