Appellant's refund claim dismissed due to limitation period under Customs Act. Challenge assessment before refund claim.

The appeal was rejected as the appellant's refund claim for excess duty collected due to incorrect assessment at the standard rate instead of the concessional rate was dismissed based on the limitation period under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. The court emphasized that challenging the assessment is a prerequisite for a refund claim and, in this case, as the appellant directly filed a refund claim without challenging the assessment, the claim was subject to the statutory time limit and was therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues:
1. Calculation of duty at standard rate instead of concessional rate.
2. Rejection of refund claim on the ground of limitation under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962.

Analysis:
1. The appellant filed 15 Bills of Entry between April to July 2004, where duty was calculated at the standard rate of CVD instead of the concessional rate available under Notification No. 7/20013-C.E., dated 1-3-2003. Consequently, excess duty was collected, leading the appellant to submit a refund claim. However, the refund claim was rejected citing the limitation of time prescribed under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962.

2. The appellant contended that since the assessment was conducted by the customs officer and the duty collected was without legal authority due to the incorrect assessment, the limitation under Section 27 should not apply. They relied on previous court decisions to support their argument. On the other hand, the learned AR referenced judgments by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the High Court of Bombay to emphasize that a refund claim must be made in accordance with the law and challenging the assessment is a prerequisite for a refund claim.

3. The presiding Member considered the arguments presented by both parties and referred to the judgments cited. The Member noted that the decisions highlighted by the appellant were older, whereas the ones referenced by the learned AR were more recent. It was concluded that since the appellants did not challenge the assessment but directly filed a refund claim, the claim must be evaluated under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. Consequently, the appeal was deemed to lack merit and was rejected.

---