Back
2024 Supreme(Guj) 1757
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Bhargav D. Karia, Niral R. Mehta, JJ.
The Principal Commissioner, Customs, Ahmedabad Commissionerate – Appellant
Versus
M/S. Gail (India) Ltd. – Respondent
R/Tax Appeal No. 211 of 2024
Decided On : 13-06-2024
Important Points
The date of service of the final assessment order is the critical date for determining the limitation period for filing refund claims under the Customs Act.
Subject
Customs Law - Refund Claims
Act Referred
Headnote
Customs - Refund Claims - Customs Act, 1962 - Sections 18, 27, 27(1B)(c) - The court interpreted the relevant date for filing refund claims under the Customs Act, emphasizing that the date of service of final assessment is crucial for determining the limitation period, rather than the date of final assessment itself.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent-assessee imported LNG and filed for a refund of excess duty paid after the final assessment of their Bills of Entry. The refund claim was rejected as time-barred by the Adjudicating Authority, leading to an appeal to the CESTAT.
Finding of the Court:
The CESTAT ruled in favor of the respondent, stating that the date of service of the final assessment order is the relevant date for computing the limitation period for refund claims, contrary to the Adjudicating Authority's interpretation.
Issues: Whether the CESTAT correctly determined the relevant date for filing a refund claim under the Customs Act, and whether the appeal should be allowed based on the facts of the case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the date of service of the final assessment order is the relevant date for the limitation period for refund claims, aligning with the interpretation of the Customs Act's provisions.
Result: The appeal was dismissed, upholding the CESTAT's decision.
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Mr C B Gupta
ORDER :
BHARGAV D. KARIA, J.
1. This appeal is filed under section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 [for short ‘the Act’] by the appellant-Revenue proposing the following substantial question of law arising out of the order dated 25.08.2013 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Ahmedabad [for short ‘CESTAT’]in Customs Appeal No. 12326 of 2018:
(i) Whether the CESTAT is right in holding that “date of service” of finalization of provisional assessment is the relevant date for computation of period of limitation for filing refund claim when section 27(1B)(c) of the Customs Act,1962 provide the date of adjustment of duty after the final assessment or date of re-assessment, as the relevant date for computation of period of limitation?
(ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the CESTAT is right in allowing the appeal of the respondent?
2. The CESTAT has allowed the appeal filed by the respondent which was preferred against the order of rejection of refund claim made by the respondent-assessee as time barred in view of the following facts.
2.1 The respondent-assessee is engaged in import of Liquified Natural Gas [LNG]. The respondent filed 16 Bills of Entry for clearance of imported LNG which was assessed provisionally under section 18 of the Act on execution of the bond. On production of the original document, the said Bills of Entry were assessed finally as under:
| Sr no | B/E/ No. & Date | TR6 Challan No. & Date (As per E- Receipt) | Date of Final Assessment | Qty.as per Bill of Lading/Pro visionally assessed Bill of Entry (MMBTU) | Qty as per final invoice/ finally Assessed bill of Entry (MMBtu) | Custom Duty paid at the time of Pro Assessment | Custom Duty to be paid as per final invoice qty/Finally Assessed B/E. | Refund claimed of excess duty paid |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 (8-7) |
| 1 | 3423536/ 01.10.2013 | 2007179039/ 01.10.2013 | 07.10.2015 | 3315760 | 3243490.09 | 157901801 | 154460215 | 3441586 |
| 2 | 3724229/ 06.11.2013 | 2007405289/ 06.11.2013 | 20.10.2015 | 3321470 | 3251856.24 | 128201536 | 125514618 | 2686918 |
| 3 | 4161112/ 23.12.2013 | 2007733287/ 26.12.2013 | 08.10.2015 | 3209670 | 3174303.82 | 179554727 | 177576797 | 1977930 |
| 4 | 6181535/ 21.07.2014 | 2009267277/ 22.07.2014 | 07.10.2015 | 3150934 | 3002707.14 | 141638631 | 134975693 | 6662938 |
| 5 | 4576314/ 07.02.2014 | 2008051383/ 10.02.2014 | 08.10.2015 | 2441880 | 2399797.88 | 117775559 | 115745892 | 2029667 |
| 6 | 4083700/ 16.12.2013 | 2007673514/ 16.12.2013 | 08.10.2015 | 3465900 | 3400095.14 | 163754376 | 160645294 | 3109082 |
| 7 | 3561494/ 17.10.2013 | 2007283015/ 18.10.2013 | 08.10.2015 | 3333260 | 3312644.41 | 153866072 | 152914700 | 951372 |
| 8 | 6005546/ 03.07.2014 | 2009135927/ 04.07.2014 | 08.10.208 | 3160082 | 2790832.64 | 141278990 | 137136063 | 4142927 |
| 9 | 9727328/ 01.04.2013 | 2005886550/ 02.04.2013 | 08.10.2015 | 3651640 | 3568274.61 | 156245997 | 152678990 | 3567007 |
| 10 | 5603392/ 26.05.2014 | 2008831620/ 07.05.2014 | 08.10.2015 | 3171073 | 3017711.82 | 140949534 | 134754331 | 6195203 |
| 11 | 3615729/ 23.10.2013 | 2007324503/ 24.10.2013 | 08.10.2015 | 3154352 | 2996419.15 | 142592621 | 135453311 | 7139310 |
| 12 | 9651747/ 22.03.2013 | 2005824134/ 26.03.2013 | 08.10.2015 | 3413153.2 | 3242553.73 | 121847591 | 115757324 | 6090267 |
| 13 | 3249824/ 12.09.2013 | 2007046497/ 13.09.2013 | 20.10.2015 | 3072092 | 2936808.15 | 126548968 | 120976253 | 5572715 |
| 14 | 3325533/ 20.09.2013 | 2007121440/ 24.09.2013 | 07.10.2015 | 3171666 | 3019477.81 | 148273795 | 140948752 | 7325043 |
| 15 | 5296506/ 24.04.2014 | 2008610173/ 26.04.2014 | 07.10.2015 | 3525072 | 3368150.68 | 176731721 | 168864423 | 7867298 |
| 16 | 5030872/ 27.03.2014 | 2008409667/ 29.03.2014 | 08.10.2015 | 3448646.1 | 3269405.04 | 175845176 | 166705793 | 9139383 |
| Total Amount of Refund (In Rs.) | 77898646 | |||||||
2.2 The respondent-assesseee filed refund application for the excess duty paid on 26.1
