2008 (6) TMI 436

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....te, for the Respondent. [Order (Oral)]. -  Revenue has filed this appeal against the impugned Order-in-Appeal No. 43/2007 (H-II) Cus. dated 8-11-2007 of Commissioner (A) wherein he has allowed the refund of an amount of Rs. 1,52,968/- claimed by the respondent. According to Revenue, the refund claim is time-barred and the Commissioner (A) ought not to have allowed the same. 2. T....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r itself indicates that the respondent is entitled for the differential duty. Appreciating all these facts, the learned Commissioner (A) has come to the conclusion that this is purely a clerical or arithmetical error governed by the Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962. Taking such a view, he allowed the  refund of the respondent. The observations of the Commissioner (A) are as follows : 4....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s as an error under Section 154 of the Customs Act, 1962. Hence, I order that the original authority should consider the refund claim on merits without invoking the limitation mentioned in Section 25 of the Customs Act, 1962. 3. In my view, the Commissioner (A)'s order is legal and proper. The respondents had brought the facts to the department's notice even on 23-3-2006 but the duty was a....