Customs duty refund limitation controls statutory claims; general mistake-based recovery period does not apply.

A refund claim for countervailing duty was held to be governed by the limitation period in section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, so a belated application was time-barred. The contention that excess duty paid under mutual mistake of fact and law could be recovered within three years under section 72 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 was rejected because the statutory refund regime in the Customs Act controlled the claim. The earlier authority cited by the importer was found inapplicable, as this was not a case where no countervailing duty was leviable at all.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim for countervailing duty was barred by limitation under section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, or could be maintained under section 72 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 on the ground of mutual mistake of fact and law.

Analysis: The refund application was made long after the period prescribed by section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. The contention that the excess duty was paid under mutual mistake and, therefore, recoverable within three years under section 72 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 was rejected, since a refund claim under the Customs Act is governed by the limitation expressly provided in that Act. The earlier decision relied upon by the importer did not assist because the present case was not one where no countervailing duty was leviable at all.

Conclusion: The refund claim was held to be time-barred under section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 and the appeal failed.

Ratio Decidendi: A refund of customs duty claimed under the Customs Act must be made within the limitation period prescribed by section 27, and the general three-year period applicable to claims based on mistake under section 72 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 does not govern such statutory refund applications.

---