9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 751X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other domestic private airlines. Time limitation for filing appeal - Held that: - the limitation for filing the same was three months under Section 128 of the CA, 1962. The appeal admittedly was filed belatedly on 28th December, 2005 and was rightly dismissed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). Petition dismissed - decided against petitioner. - W. P. (C) 2340/2007 - - - Dated:- 18-7-2017 - S. Muralidhar And Prathiba M. Singh, JJ. For the Petitioner : Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. U. A. Rana, Mr. Himanshu Mehta, Mr. Avirat Kumar and Mr. Satendra Kumar Rai, Advs For the Respondent : Through: Mr. Sanjeev Narula, Sr. Standing Counsel and Mr. Abhishek Ghai, Adv ORDER Prathiba M. Singh, J. 1. A short quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed ₹ 2,36,06,775/- between October, 2001 to October, 2003, towards IATT qua Sky Marshals, sought refund of on the ground that the exemption ought to be extended to it. This refund claim was processed and Assistant Commissioner of Customs (IATT) by order dated 5th November, 2004 sanctioned refund of ₹ 6,48,954/- for the period subsequent to 8th October, 2003 but the remaining refund claim amount of ₹ 2,29,23,656/- pertaining to the period 1st October, 2001 to 7th October, 2003 was rejected. In the meantime, the Petitioner had made a representation to the Joint Secretary (Finance) on 7th October, 2005 which was also rejected vide order dated 16th November, 2005 by the Director (Customs). 4. The Petitioner thereafter filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the Petitioner has not challenged the validity of either the provisions of law viz., Sections 41(f) and 42 of the FA or any of the notifications/circulars issued. Analysis 8. Sections 41(f), 42 and 45 of the FA read as under:- 41. Definitions.-In this Chapter, unless the context otherwise requires,- (f) passenger means any person boarding, at any aerodrome, an aircraft for performing an inland journey, but does not include,- (i) a person who performs an inland journey on a through international ticket and which precedes, or forms part of a series of journeys preceding, or follows, or forms part of a series of journeys following, a journey to or from a place outside India on the same ticket; or (ii) a person ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er or other person in charge of an aircraft shall allow any passenger to board the aircraft unless such passenger has paid the inland air travel tax. 9. A perusal of the above three provisions shows that it was compulsory for all airlines to collect IATT from all passengers. 10. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs in the writ petition. (a) Issue a Writ of certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari, calling for the records of the present case and after scrutinising the same, set aside and quash the impugned Order in original of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs dated 05.11.2004; (b) In the alternative, issue a Writ of certiorari or writ in the nature of Certiorari, calling for the records of the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otification no.2/2001 dated 09.04.2001 is only applicable purely in relation to India airlines and the carrier is not entitled for availment of the benefits of said notification. 13. This cannot be faulted with inasmuch as it is a matter of fact that Notification No.2 of 2001 dated 19th April, 2001 granted the exemption from IATT to only sky marshals performing inland journey by air on free tickets issued by the Indian Airlines. The exemption was only subsequently extended to other domestic private airlines. Thus, there is no error in the order dated 5th November, 2004. 14. Insofar as the Appellate order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) is concerned, the limitation for filing the same was three months under Section 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
