Refund claim for short landing treated as valid where the authorised CHA's initial notice satisfied limitation requirements.

A refund claim arising from short landing of imported goods was held not to be time-barred because the authorised CHA's initial letter put the department on notice of the shortage and sought refund. The later filing of supporting documents and prescribed forms did not defeat the substantive claim in the peculiar facts of the case. The shortage was established by the mismatch between the declared quantity and the goods actually received, and the initial letter was treated as a valid refund claim for limitation purposes. Refund denial was therefore set aside and consequential relief followed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim arising from short landing of imported goods was barred by limitation and whether the initial letter seeking refund could be treated as the claim.

Analysis: The imported consignment was found to have suffered substantial short landing, with the declared quantity of 1000 heat detectors not matching the consignment weight and only 100 units having been received. The initial letter dated 06.09.2006, sent by the authorised CHA, put the department on notice of the shortage and sought refund, though supporting documents and the prescribed format were furnished later. In the peculiar facts, the later procedural compliance was held not to defeat the substantive claim, and the initial letter was treated as the refund claim.

Conclusion: The refund claim was not rejected as time-barred, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.

Final Conclusion: The denial of refund was set aside on the footing that the shortage was established and the refund request made by the authorised CHA could be treated as a valid claim for limitation purposes.

---