TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 391
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted from the related foreign supplier, the appellant was required to get the transactions verified and investigated by the Special Valuation Branch on periodical basis. The Notification No. 102/07-Cus dated 14/09/2007 provides for various conditions for claiming refund of SAD. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Refunds) rejected the claim of SAD refund amounting to Rs. 1,15,09,156/- on the ground that the claims were filed beyond the time limit prescribed under Notification No. 102/07-Cus dated 14/09/2007 as amended by Notification No. 93/2008 dated 1/08/2008 and also Board's Circular No. 6/2008 dated 28.04.2008 and 16/2008 dated 13/10/2008. On appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the lower authority's order and rejecte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....% EDD for all the 19 Bills of Entry. The Ld. Advocate vehemently argued that the aforesaid notification 102/07-Cus dated 14/09/2007 did not provide for any limitation period for filing of SAD refund. The limitation period of one year was inserted vide Notification No. 93/2008 dated 01.08/2008. Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with explanation 2 provides that the limitation period shall be computed from the date of adjustment of duty of final assessment. He relied to the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) No. 5120/2011 vide final order dated 13.09.2013 in the appellant's own case on identical facts and issues reported in 2014 (301) E.L.T. 59 (Del.) , wherein the Hon'ble High Court set aside the order a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Court of Delhi is reproduced as under:- "38.In view of the above discussion, we feel that it will be proper to harmoniously construe and interpret notification dated 1st August, 2008 and Section 27 read with Circular dated 29th July, 2010 by holding that an Assessee can make a claim for refund under Notification No. 93 of 2008 dated 1st August, 2008 either by filing an application for refund within the limitation period specified under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 or within the extended limitation period of one year from the actual date of payment even, if the said payment made was pursuant to provisional assessment. The longer of the two periods i.e. the period specified under Section 27 or the notification dated 1st August, 2008....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he same was dealing with the issue of interest on delayed refunds. 42. Since the petitioner has filed the claims within the period stipulated by Section 27 of the Act, in view of the construction given by us, the same could not have been rejected on the ground of limitation. 43. In view of the above, the impugned Circular No. 23/2010-Customs to the extent it holds that Section 27 of the Act has no application is held ultra vires the statute and quashed. The impugned orders dated 21-3-2011 and 27-4-2011 passed by Respondent No. 2 relying on Circular No. 23/2010-Customs, dated 29-7-2010 are hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to Respondent No. 2 to assess the claim of the petitioner for refund on imports and to process the same ....