2023 (9) TMI 1265 - AT - Customs

Appeal allowed, time-barred order set aside under Customs Act. Remanded for decision on merits.

Art N Glass Versus C. C- Ludhiana

Art N Glass Versus C. C- Ludhiana - TMI Issues involved:The appeal against the order rejecting it as time-barred under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962.Facts of the case:The appellant imported 'Euro Grey Float Glass 3300X2140 MM 5 MM' from China and was directed to deposit Anti-Dumping Duty. After testing, it was found that the goods did not attract Anti-Dumping Duty. The appellant filed a refund claim, which was rejected by the Assistant Commissioner. The appellant filed an appeal within the prescribed 60-day period under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962.Arguments by the appellant:The appellant's consultant argued that the appeal was filed within the stipulated time after receiving the Assistant Commissioner's order, not from the date of the CSIR report. It was contended that the time limitation under Section 128 is not applicable as it involves an amount collected without authority of law, citing a Supreme Court decision.Arguments by the Departmental Representative:The DR reiterated the findings in the impugned order, supporting the rejection of the appeal as time-barred.Judgment:After considering the submissions, the Member (Judicial) found that the appeal was filed within the prescribed period from the receipt of the Assistant Commissioner's order. The dismissal of the appeal as time-barred was deemed unsustainable, and the impugned order was set aside. The case was remanded back to the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide on the merits within two months from the date of receipt of the order.Outcome:The appeal was allowed by way of remand, directing the Commissioner (Appeals) to decide the case on its merits within a specified timeframe.