The Single member bench of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal ( CESTAT ), Allahabad, ruled that there was no time limit prescribed under Section 27 of Customs Act, 1962 for refund of penalty and redemption fine.
This refund claim has been rejected by the Original Authority on the ground that they have been filed beyond the prescribed period of limitation as per Section 27.Assessee challenged the said order rejecting their refund claim who has vide impugned order dismissed the appeals.
Mr. Jatin Mahajan representing the assessee submitted that there was no time limit prescribed under Section 27 for refund of final penalty. Reliance is placed on the decision in case of Cooper Pharma.Undisputedly these amounts were paid under protest for the release of confiscated goods and the appeal has been allowed with consequential relief by the Tribunal.
The bench found that the contention of the assessee that the provisions of Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 will not be applicable in the instant case was not acceptable. Section 27 is the only provision in the entire Customs Act which allows refunds of amount deposited by any person or persons and there is no other provision under which the Customs Authorities can process any claim for refund under the Customs Law. Therefore, if the provisions of Section 27 is not applicable, the proper officer will also not be competent to entertain or grant the refund of the claim for refund that has been made by the appellant before the proper officer
The proviso to Section 27 stated that the limitation of one year shall not apply where any duty or interest has been paid under protest, and as such, in this particular case, the limitation period of one year from the date of deposit will not be applicable as the amounts were deposited under protest.
The period of limitation shall not apply in the present case and refunds claim have to be adjudicated accordingly, treating that these amounts of redemption fine and penalties were paid under protest as per the direction of the department, for effecting the clearance of the goods though the order imposing the fine and penalty was challenged in appeal.
Thus though the coram of Sanjiv Srivastava (Technical member) hold that the refund claim has to be processed under the provisions of Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, as this is a case of consequential refund of penalty and redemption fine, the same cannot be held to be barred by the limitation as provided in the said section.
Thus CESTAT does not find any merits in the impugned order. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
