2025 (8) TMI 421

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o.75200/2023. The revenue has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration : "a) Whether the refund application was required to be made within one year from the judgment and order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M/s. SRF Vs. Commissioner of Customs Chennai as per provision of sub-section 1B(b) of section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962? b) Whether the refund application dated 06.02.2018 filed by the respondent is time barred and liable to be rejected? c) Whether the impugned order dated 02.05.2024 passed by the Learned Tribunal is contrary to the provision of section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 and also not sustainable in view of the Circular No.24/2004-Cus. Dated 18/03/2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ss the assessment order is not modified as per law, the refund claim under section 27 does not arise, that is, the refund proceedings cannot be used as a substitute for appeal proceedings and the effect of `under protest' is only in the context that the time limit under section 27 would not apply. Further, it was contended that the very protest made by the respondent came to an end after the decision of the Hon'ble Surepme Court in SRF Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, 2015 (318) ELT 607 (SC) and the protest made by the respondent would not survive beyond the date of judgment of the Supreme Court dated 26.3.2015. The learned Tribunal considered the said contention raised by the revenue and rejected the same after taking note of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....owed to the date when the appellant therein made the application for refund, that is, 2009 and the interest beyond that time may be given. There are other decisions of the Tribunal on the very issue holding that the assessee paying duty under protest and intimating to the Assistant commissioner by letter that since it required consignment urgently for its product it would be clearing payment of duty under protest and such protest alleged by the assessee would remain till the disputed issue was settled finally by higher appellate forums and in the absence of any order indicating vacating of protest on an adverse order having been passed against the assessee, duty having been paid under protest would not be hit by limitation prescribed und....