Top
Begin typing your search above and press return to search.

Denial of Customs Refund without Considering Request to Reassess Bill of Entry: Delhi HC  directs to Dispose of Proceedings Within 6 week [Read Order]

The court directed to dispose of the petition against the denial of customs refund

Denial of Customs Refund without Considering Request to Reassess Bill of Entry: Delhi HC  directs to Dispose of Proceedings Within 6 week [Read Order]
X

The Delhi High Court directed to dispose of the petition against the denial of Customs refund without considering the request to reassess the bill of entry. The court directed to dispose of the petition and proceedings within 6 weeks. M/s Technology Next, the petitioner sought direction from the respondent to sanction and grant the refund of excess duty of Rs.8,42,518/-. Petitioner is...


The Delhi High Court directed to dispose of the petition against the denial of Customs refund without considering the request to reassess the bill of entry. The court directed to dispose of the petition and proceedings within 6 weeks.

M/s Technology Next, the petitioner sought direction from the respondent to sanction and grant the refund of excess duty of Rs.8,42,518/-. Petitioner is engaged in the business of trading internet networking equipment. The Petitioner vide Bill of Entry had imported networking equipment whereby the Assessing Authority changed the classification for certain items, thereby attracting a larger percentage of customs duty than the previous classification.  

The petitioner had requested the Assessing Authority to reassess the Bill of Entry and issue a speaking order. However, the Assessing Authority neither reassessed the Bill of Entry nor passed any speaking order. Further, Petitioner paid Rs.8,42,518/- as customs duty to clear the consignment. 

The appeal filed by the petitioner was decided vide order wherein the appeal was allowed, and the matter was remanded back to the Assessing Authority with directions to pass a speaking order after giving an opportunity for a personal hearing to the Petitioner. 

Counsel for the respondent submitted that the adjudicating proceedings are still pending before the competent authority and assures that the same shall be disposed of expeditiously. 

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order is in appeal and to date, the adjudicating authority has not disposed of the proceedings. He further submitted that the impugned order which recorded that the Notification dated 10.12.2019 was made effective from 01.01.2020 seems to suggest that the bill of entry lodged by the petitioner was filed after the Notification came into force. He submitted that the bill of entry was filed on 16.11.2019 before the Notification admittedly came into force on 01.01.2020.

A division bench comprising Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Ravinder Dudeja disposed of the petition directing the adjudicating authority to dispose of the proceedings expeditiously within six weeks from today after giving an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. 

It was clarified that it would be open to the petitioner to avail of such further remedies as may be permissible in law in case the petitioner is aggrieved by any decision taken by the respondents.

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

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

Next Story

Related Stories

All Rights Reserved. Copyright @2019