2017 (9) TMI 1088

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....l for the appellant and perused the material on record. From the record, it appears that in the instant case, issue involved pertains to refund which was denied by the adjudicating authority but the same was allowed by the appellate authority. Hence, the department is in appeal. 4. From the record, it appears that the respondent has filed the refund claim on 15.7.14 pertaining to Special Additional duty of Customs (SAD) paid by them for Bill of Entry dated 12.6.2013 for which they had paid duty on 12.6.2013. Refund claim was rejected by the adjudicating authority as refund claim was said to be filed after the expiry of one year from the date of payment of duty by the respondent. It was the claim of the respondent that there is no time li....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t has been expressed that whether the normal time-limit of six months prescribed in Section 27 of the Customs Act, would apply. In the absence of specific provision of Section 27 being made applicable in the said notification, the time-limit prescribed in this section would not be automatically applicable to refunds under the notification. Further, it was also represented that the goods imported may have to be dispatched for sale to different parts of the country and that the importer may find it difficult to dispose of the imported goods 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....