2013 (2) TMI 317

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... No. 236380 dated 30.8.2006. The declared quantity was 1000 units of heat detectors valued at Rs. 2,61,644/- covered by Air Waybill No. HAWB 608040 and the weight was mentioned as 18 Kgs.     (b) The Bill of Entry was cleared under RMS procedure and there was no examination of the goods.     (c) The goods were taken for clearance on the same date after payment of duty amounting to Rs.96,119/-.     (d) CHA noticed that the number of heat conductors in the package was only 100 as against 1000 units and therefore, sought for refund of duty paid relating to 900 units not received amounting to Rs.86,507.10 vide their letter dated 6.9.2006.     (e) The department vide letter ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s in proper format as prescribed under Customs Refund Application (Regulation 1995). Since such refund claim has been filed only after the expiry of six months, the claim was clearly time barred. Relying on a decision of the Tribunal in the case of Collector of Customs, Madras vs. Guindy Machine Tools Ltd. [2004 (171) E.L.T. 424 (Tri.-Chennai)], she submits that once the goods have been cleared through Customs, subsequent shortage at customers' premises cannot be treated as a case of short landing of the goods. 6.1. I have carefully considered the submissions from both sides and perused the records. It is not in dispute that the original authority has accepted the short landing as seen from the relevant portion of the findings in his ord....