Setback for Gabriel India Ltd: CESTAT Rules Assessment Was Regular, Not Provisional, Refund Denied [Read Order]
The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the order of the first appellate authority. The appeal was dismissed, and the refund claim of ₹ 3,21,650 was denied.
Gabriel - CESTAT - Refund - taxscan.
Gabriel - CESTAT - Refund - taxscan.
While dismissing the appeal filed by Gabriel India Ltd, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Mumbai has held that a refund claim on customs duty was time-barred as the assessment was a regular assessment and not a provisional one.
The appellant, M/s Gabriel India Ltd., an importer of aluminium ingots, had followed a 'standard operating procedure' for 87 of its 88 imports. This involved depositing disputed customs duty 'under protest' pending a provisional assessment, which was later finalized, leading to a refund.
The dispute arose concerning a single bill of entry dated 13.12.2017. While the appellant paid the disputed duty of ₹ 3,21,650, its refund claim filed on 10.06.2019 was rejected by the original authority and the first appellate authority as time-barred. They held the assessment was finalized on 27.12.2017, well before the claim was made.
Master the Latest Amendments in Income Tax Act Click here
The appellant contended that the finalization of the assessment for this specific bill of entry was never properly communicated to them. They argued that the purported finalization date of 27.12.2017 was erroneous and should have aligned with the conclusion of an internal report dated 10.06.2019.
The single bench of Mr. C J Mathew (Member, Technical), after perusing the records, found that this particular bill of entry was not provisionally assessed under Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962. Instead, it was a regular assessment under Section 17. The bench held that the purported date of 'finalization' was, in fact, the date of the regular assessment.
The Tribunal reasoned that since the assessment was regular and not provisional, the provisions for extending the limitation period based on the pendency of a provisional assessment's finalization could not apply. The limitation period for filing a refund claim against a regular assessment under Section 17 commences from the date of payment of the duty.
The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the order of the first appellate authority. The appeal was dismissed, and the refund claim of ₹ 3,21,650 was denied.
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscanpremium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
