Procedural compliance for bulk Bill of Entry short-closing required before refund-related relief can be examined on merits

The dispute concerned whether short-closing of bulk Bills of Entry and related refund relief could be granted without first following the prescribed procedure. The Court treated the matter as procedural, noting that amendment, refund and certification requirements had to be complied with before the grievance could be examined on merits. It therefore required the petitioner to submit a fresh application before the competent authority, which was to consider the request in accordance with law and may call for completion of the necessary legal formalities.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner should first approach the competent authority for short-closing the bulk Bills of Entry and related refund-related reliefs by following the prescribed procedure.

Analysis: The dispute was treated as procedural rather than merits-based. The respondents insisted on compliance with the procedure prescribed for amendment, refund and related certification, while the petitioner sought foreclosure of the remaining quantities and refund of the unutilised duty without a prior fresh application. The Court found it appropriate that the petitioner place a fresh request before the competent authority, which would then examine the grievance on merits and may require the petitioner to complete any legal formalities.

Conclusion: The petitioner was required to make a fresh application before the competent authority, and the authority was directed to decide it in accordance with law within the stipulated time.

---