Court Orders Refund of Additional Customs Duty with 6% Interest Due to Procedural Violations; Refund in Four Weeks.

The HC quashed Order-in-Original No. 37233/2015, directing the respondent to refund the Additional Duty of Customs with 6% interest from the refund application date. The court found procedural violations, including a lack of show cause notice, justifying the writ petition under Article 226. The refund is to be disbursed within four weeks, with no costs imposed.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Rejection of refund claim for Additional Duty of Customs.
2. Adherence to procedural regulations and conditions under Notification No. 102/2007 and Circular No. 6/2008.
3. Maintainability of the writ petition despite the availability of an alternate remedy.
4. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Rejection of Refund Claim for Additional Duty of Customs:
The petitioner imported an "Elevator in SKD condition" and paid Additional Duty of Customs amounting to Rs. 39,899.70. Upon selling the elevator in India, the petitioner sought a refund under Notification No. 102/2007, which was rejected on the grounds that the description of the imported goods did not match the goods sold in India. The respondent argued that the discrepancy between the descriptions in the Bill of Entry and the Sale Invoice violated the notification's conditions.

2. Adherence to Procedural Regulations and Conditions under Notification No. 102/2007 and Circular No. 6/2008:
The petitioner complied with the procedure for refund claims as outlined in Circular No. 6/2008, which mandates the submission of a certificate from the Statutory Auditor and a Correlation Certificate. The petitioner provided these documents, certifying that the imported goods were the same as those sold locally. The court emphasized that the respondent must strictly adhere to the procedures and cannot deviate from them. The respondent's differentiation between "elevator" and "lift" was deemed unsubstantial, and the court noted that the Statutory Auditor's certificate should be relied upon unless there are incriminating and reliable documents to the contrary.

3. Maintainability of the Writ Petition Despite the Availability of an Alternate Remedy:
The respondent argued that the writ petition should be dismissed as the petitioner did not exhaust the alternate remedy of an appeal. However, the court noted that the decision in M/s. King Overseas v. Assistant Commissioner of Customs was set aside in appeal, allowing the writ petition to proceed. The court held that the writ petition is maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India due to the procedural violations and lack of jurisdiction by the authority.

4. Violation of Principles of Natural Justice:
The impugned order was issued without a show cause notice, violating the Principles of Natural Justice. The court held that this procedural lapse justified the invocation of writ jurisdiction without requiring the petitioner to exhaust alternate remedies.

Conclusion:
The court quashed the impugned Order-in-Original No. 37233/2015, dated 30-4-2015, and directed the respondent to refund the claimed amount with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. from the date of the refund application. The refund should be disbursed within four weeks from the receipt of the court's order. The writ petition was allowed, and no costs were imposed.

---