Prospective limitation in customs refund claims cannot defeat rights arising under an earlier notification with no filing deadline.

A later customs notification introducing a one-year limitation for refund claims cannot be applied to duty paid when an earlier notification was in force and no filing period was prescribed. The limitation inserted by Notification No. 93/2008-Cus. operated prospectively only, and there was no express retrospective effect. The refund claim therefore could not be rejected as time-barred on the basis of the later notification. The rejection was unsustainable, and the assessee was entitled to refund with consequential relief.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refund claim could be rejected as time-barred by applying the limitation introduced by Notification No. 93/2008-Cus. dated 01.08.2008 to duty paid when Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. dated 14.09.2007 was in force and no time-limit was prescribed.

Analysis: At the time the duty was paid, Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. was operative and did not prescribe any period for filing the refund claim. The later Notification No. 93/2008-Cus. introduced a one-year time-limit, but it was not given retrospective effect. A limitation provision introduced later cannot be applied to refund claims arising from duty paid before its commencement unless the notification expressly so provides.

Conclusion: The rejection of the refund claim as time-barred was unsustainable and the assessee was entitled to refund.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the refund appeal succeeded with consequential relief.

Ratio Decidendi: A limitation period introduced by a later notification operates prospectively and cannot defeat a refund claim based on duty paid under an earlier notification that contained no such time-limit.

---