Customs Duty paid Voluntarily during Investigation does not amount to pre-deposit, Refund claim not sustainable: CESTAT [Read Order]

Custom duty - pre-deposit - refund - CESTAT - taxscan

In the case of Sky Airways, the New Delhi bench of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has held that the customs duty paid voluntarily during the investigation does not amount to pre-deposit and the claim of refund is not sustainable.

The appeal challenged the order dated June 17, 2019, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) by which the order dated March 19, 2018, passed by the Assistant Commissioner has been upheld.

The Assistant Commissioner rejected the refund claim of Rs. 3,00,82,889/- filed by the appellant and the contention advanced by the appellant that the aforesaid amount, which was voluntarily deposited by the appellant during the investigation, should be treated as a pre-deposit amount.

The helicopter was confiscated under section 111(d) and section 111(o) of the Customs Act,1982 with an option to redeem the same after payment of the redemption fine and the demand of duty was confirmed.  It was, however, appropriated as the appellant had already deposited the said amount during an investigation. 

The contention of the appellant that the amount deposited voluntarily during the investigation should be treated as an amount towards the pre-deposit was rejected for the reason that it was not an amount deposited at the time of filing of the appeal. 

It was observed that the appellant had not deposited the amount towards the pre-deposit and in any view of the matter, the Tribunal had even after setting aside the order appealed against remanded the matter for a fresh adjudication with a direction to the parties to maintain status quo.

Mr Justice Dilip Gupta, president and Mr P V Subba Rao, member (technical) while dismissing the appeal held that the appellant was bound by the order of status quo passed by the Tribunal and could not have asked for a refund of the amount deposited by the appellant voluntary during the investigation.

Shri Rakesh Kumar appeared for the respondent while none appeared for the Appellant.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates

taxscan-loader