2013 (12) TMI 176

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... instant refund claim was filed as per the conditions laid down in Notification No. 102/2007, dated 14-9-2007 for exemption of Addl. Duty of Customs leviable under sub-section (5) of Section 3 of Customs Tariff Act which is granted to the importer in India for subsequent sale, subject to fulfillment of conditions laid down in the said Notification. Appellant also submitted all the certificates and documents required to be fulfilled under Notification No. 102/2007, dated 14-9-2007 for claiming the exemption of Additional duty of Customs. Department found that the appellant fulfilled all the conditions as laid down in the Notification No. 102/07 dated 14-9-2007 and also found the refunds claims admissible on the point of unjust enrichment ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oods and complete the requisite documentation within the normal period of six months. Taking into account various factors, it has been decided to permit importers to file claims under the above exemption upto a period of one year from the date of payment of duty. Necessary change in the notification is being made so as to incorporate a specific provision prescribing maximum time-limit of one year from the date of payment of duty, within which the refund could be filed by any person. It is also clarified that the importers would be entitled to refund of duties only in respect of quantities for which the prescribed documents are made available and the claims submitted within the maximum prescribed time of one year. Unsold stocks would not be ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d by the appellant there was no time-limit for filing the refund claim. It is not in dispute. The only dispute arose when the Notification No. 93/2008 came into force with effect from 1-8-2008. In the various decisions of this Tribunal as well as of the Hon'ble Apex Court particularly in the case of Suchitra Components Ltd. v. CCE, Guntur - 2007 (208) E.L.T. 321 (S.C.) = 2008 (11) S.T.R. 430 (S.C.) it was held that beneficial circular to be applied retrospectively while oppressive circular applicable prospectively. In this case, it is no doubt that the appellants paid the duty when the Notification 93/2008 dated 1-8-2008 was not in operation. Therefore, the payment of duty in this case is not bound by Notification 93/2008 as the Notificatio....