2018 (10) TMI 668

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ament Yarn falling under Tariff Item 54021990 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. They filed refund claim of Rs. 12,16,900/- on 18.05.2016 on account of additional duty of custom levied under Section 3(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 paid at the time of import of the yarn in terms of Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dt. 14.09.2007. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Centralised Refunds, CFS, Ludhina sanctioned the refund claim of Rs. 8,16,453/- and rejected the remaining claim for Rs. 4,00,442/- on account of being hit by bar of limitation of one year. Aggrieved by the said rejection, the appellants filed the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who by impugned order has rejected their appeal. Hence the present appeal. 3. Heard bot....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... A.R. defended the impugned order and submitted that as per Section 27 of the Act, the refund has to be filed within one year from date of payment of custom duty, but in the present case, the refund was partially allowed and partially disallowed as the same was beyond limitation. In support of his submissions, he relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Asst. Collr. Of Custom vs. Anam Electrical Manufacturing Co. reported in 1997 (90) ELT 260 (S.C.). 6. After considering the submissions made by both the parties and perusal of the material on record, I find that as per the Notification No. 102/2007-Cus dt. 14.09.2007 as amended vide Notification No. 93/2008-Cus dt. 01.08.2008, additional duty of customs is exempted if....