Tribunal dismisses rectification plea on Special Additional Duty refund dispute, emphasizes timely objections.

The Tribunal dismissed the Miscellaneous Applications seeking rectification of mistake in the Final Order related to a dispute on the refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) due to an invalid CA certificate, emphasizing that the issue was not about the duty rate but the erroneous refund and subsequent demand. The Member clarified that jurisdictional objections should have been raised earlier and could not be entertained post-order. The Tribunal affirmed the decision, concluding there was no mistake in the Final Order and bringing closure to the matter.

---

---

Issues:
Rectification of mistake in Final Order related to Notification No.102/2007, dispute on refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD), validity of CA certificate for refund claim, jurisdictional objection post-order.

Analysis:

The case involved the filing of Miscellaneous Applications seeking rectification of mistake in the Final Order dated 18/04/2018. The main contention raised was regarding the dispute on the fulfillment of Notification No.102/2007 or any other Exemption Notification related to Special Additional Duty (SAD). The Appellant argued that such disputes fall under the rate of duty of Customs as per Section 129C(4)(b) of the Customs Act, emphasizing that the issue of refund of SAD is directly linked to the rate of SAD payable. The Appellant relied on the decision of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in a similar case, highlighting that the refund of SAD falls under the rate of SAD payable, as per the judgment of the Supreme Court in a relevant case.

The Department, represented by the Ld. DR, contended that the rate of duty of SAD was not in dispute since the refund had already been sanctioned and issued to the assessee. However, it was later discovered that the CA certificate submitted during the refund process was deemed invalid, leading to subsequent actions by the Department.

Upon hearing both sides and examining the applications and the Final Order, the Member (Judicial) noted that the issue before the Bench was not related to the rate of duty but focused on post-refund developments concerning the validity of the CA certificate. The Bench clarified that the dispute was not about the duty rate but about the erroneous refund and subsequent demand, along with the penalty imposed under Section 114A of the Customs Act. Additionally, the Member highlighted that objections regarding jurisdiction should have been raised earlier in the proceedings and could not be entertained after the order was passed.

Consequently, after thorough consideration, the Member concluded that there was no apparent mistake in the Final Order dated 18/04/2018 and dismissed the Miscellaneous Applications for rectification of mistake, affirming the decision of the Tribunal. The judgment was dictated and pronounced in the open court, bringing closure to the matter at hand.

---