TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 276X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the order of this Tribunal in the case of IFGL REFRACTORIES LTD VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL TAX, GUNTUR [2024 (11) TMI 807 - CESTAT HYDERABAD], wherein the issue was that the original refund sanctioning authority, after going through the facts and submissions made by the appellant, inter alia, held the refund claim as time barred as the same was not filed before the expiry of one year period from payment of duty and interest. Conclusion - In the facts of the case, no fault can be found with the rejection of the refund claim, which has admittedly been filed beyond the limitation period under the relevant statute i.e., Customs Act, 1962 and therefore, there is no ground for interfering with the impugned order. There are no merit in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... irected to return the original EPCG Authorization duly endorsed by Customs having paid duty together with interest. The Deputy Commissioner of Customs, ICD, Sanathnagar vide letter dt.20.02.2017 directed the appellant to pay the duty foregone along with interest on the imports made under the said license as they have failed to produce EODC issued by DGFT before the expiry of export obligation. Accordingly, the appellant paid the Customs Duty foregone against the EPCG License No. 0930001522 dated 02.06.2005 vide the following TR-6 challans:- S.No. Challan No. Date Amount (in Rs.) 1 06452 01.03.2017 8,50,000/- 2 07429 12.10.2017 8,50,000/- 3 07599 15.11.2017 8,50,000/- 4 07723 11.12.2017 8,44,385/- Tot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when the subject bills of entry under which the imports were made by the appellant were re-assessed in terms of section 17(4) of the Customs Act, 1962 and the only other recourse available to the department in the facts of the case would be to issue notice in terms of section 28(1) or 28(4) and thereafter, determine the duty payable and order appropriation of any amounts pre-deposited towards said duty liability. He further prays that appeal may be allowed by setting aside the impugned order with consequential relief, in the interest of justice. 4. Learned AR for Revenue submits that after the expiry of obligation period under EPCG, the appellant paid the amount of duty foregone vide challans dt.01.03.2017, 12.10.2017, 15.11.2017 & 11.12. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der section 27(1) of the Customs Act, 1962..". 6. Learned AR has also relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Cummins Technologies India Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India [2023 (9) TMI 199 - Bombay HC], wherein, it was observed that section 27 of the Customs Act clearly requires that any person claiming refund of any duty is to make an application in the form or manner as may be prescribed before the expiry of one year from the date of payment of such duty or interest. But in the present case, the appellant has filed refund claim after the expiry of one year. Accordingly, he prays for dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant. 7. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant, Mr. Srinivas Chaturvedula and learned AR fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorities to refund the money so collected from the bank to the bank concerned forthwith. This case is clearly distinguishable as in the present case, there is no bank guarantee and the appellants had not deposited such amount in compliance of any court order/directions. 10. Learned Counsel for the appellant has also relied on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of M/s Nizamabad Agro Pvt Ltd Vs Assistant Commissioner of Customs [2016 (9) TMI 831 - Madras HC]. In this case also, bank guarantees were involved, which is not the subject matter of the present case and hence distinguishable. 11. Learned Counsel for the appellant has also relied on the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case of CC (Airport) V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|