2000 (11) TMI 413 - AT - Central Excise

Refund claim appeal dismissed for late price declaration by CEGAT Appellate Tribunal.

The appeal regarding a refund claim rejected due to a late price declaration was dismissed by the Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi, in line with a ... Refund claim - price declaration filed after clearance - statutory restriction on refund claims under Rule 173C - preclusion of collateral challenge to an adjudication by way of refund - availability of statutory appeal as exclusive remedy - application of ratio in Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur v. Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. Refund claim - price declaration filed after clearance - preclusion of collateral challenge to an adjudication by way of refund - availability of statutory appeal as exclusive remedy - application of ratio in Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur v. Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. - Whether a refund claim is maintainable where the price declaration entitling to lower duty was filed after clearance of goods and the aggrieved party did not avail itself of the statutory appeal remedy. - HELD THAT: - The Tribunal accepted the Revenue's contention that the refund claim was properly rejected because the revised price declaration was filed only after clearance of the goods. The Court relied on the established principle, as applied in Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur v. Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. , that where an adjudicating authority has passed an appealable order and the aggrieved party fails to avail the statutory right of appeal, it is not permissible to subsequently challenge the correctness of that order by an alternative route such as a refund claim. The appellant's submission that Rule 173C does not bar refund claims and that the facts were distinguishable was considered but found unavailing; the Tribunal held that the factual circumstances did not take the case outside the principle that a collateral challenge to an adjudication via refund is precluded when an appeal lay but was not pursued.Appeal dismissed; refund claim held not maintainable because the revised price declaration was filed subsequent to clearance and the statutory appeal process was the appropriate remedy.Final Conclusion: The appeal is dismissed: the refund claim was correctly rejected as the revised price declaration was filed after clearance and the claimant cannot circumvent the appeal remedy by seeking refund. The Appellate Tribunal CEGAT, New Delhi dismissed the appeal regarding a refund claim rejected by authorities due to a late price declaration filed after clearance of goods. The tribunal found no justification for the refund claim based on the timing of the declaration, in line with a previous Supreme Court decision. The appeal was dismissed.