1997 (3) TMI 296

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....und of customs duty which were rejected by the Assistant Collector holding that refund claims had not been filed within the limitation period of six months as laid down in Section 27 of the Customs Act. 3. When the matter came up before the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Maruti Udyog pleaded that the obligation of payment of duty stood discharged only on the date on which the Challan is got cancelled with the customs authorities by linking it with the Bill of Entry pertaining to the dutiable goods and the customs duty payment to the bank authorities cannot be treated on par with the payment of duty to the Customs Treasury. This argument was rejected by the Collector of Customs (Appeals). 4. When the matter was called on 4-3-199....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t is deposited by the importer in pursuance of assessment by Customs and the amount so deposited became Government revenue realised as customs duty. The cancellation of Challan is merely procedural in nature and an administrative act. 7. In the impugned order the Collector of Customs relying on Section 27 of the Customs Act observed that the relevant date for purposes of computation of limitation was the date of payment of duty with interest. He observed that the relevant date for purposes of payment of duty can only be the date of deposit of duty. The date on which the Challan was cancelled can be linked only for purposes of out-of-charge order. 8. On behalf of the appellants it has been contended in the ground of appeals that ....