2017 (1) TMI 528

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....iled after expiry of one year prescribed under the Notification No. 93/2008-Cus., dated 01.08.2008 read with Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Heard both the sides and perused the record. 3. The issue involved in this appeal for consideration by the Tribunal is, as to whether, the time limit prescribed in the Notification No. 93/08 dated 01.08.2008 will have the retrospective application for denying the refund benefit to the imports made during the period from 19.09.2007 to 18.01.2008. 4. Notification No. 102/07-Cus dated 14.09.2007 exempts goods from payment of SAD leviable thereon, subject to fulfillment of certain conditions by the importer. The conditions itemized therein are that at the time of importation of goods, the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(Del.). The Hon'ble High Court has ruled that subsequent sale of goods on incurrence of sales tax/VAT is the condition precedent for claiming refund of the SAD amount and that since achieving such objective is not in the hands of tax payer, time limit cannot be prescribed by issuance of notification under sub-section (1) of Section 25 ibid. The relevant paragraph in the said judgment is extracted below:- "12. The provisions of the Customs Act on the rules and mechanism for refund is incorporated by reference into the CTA only so far as may be applicable. Since SADC levied under Section 3(5) is refundable only on subsequent sale (i.e. the point at which sales tax/VAT liability arises), it is the opinion of this Court that no limitat....