2025 (8) TMI 1013

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g the petitioner to work out the appellate remedy once again considering the fact that the dispute between the imports made by the petitioner during March 2011 to May 2011 and the refund claims were filed during May 2012 to October 2012. 2. The petitioner is before this Court against the impugned order in Appeal No.19/2023-TTN(Cus)-App in file No.C24/05/2021/TTN(Cus)(D)- APP dated 28.06.2023. 3. By the impugned order, the respondent as the Appellate Commissioner has allowed the departmental appeal filed by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Review, Customs House, Tuticorin in Appeal No. 19/2023-TTN(Cus)-App against the Order-in-Original 79/2021 dated 16.11.2021 passed earlier by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Refund, Custo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... by various Courts that the prosecution of the case before the wrong forum has to be excluded for considering the limitation. Taking all these aspects into consideration, we are of the view that the appellant has to be given a further chance to present their claims before the correct jurisdictional authority. On weighing the facts as well as the law on the issue, we are of the opinion that the matter requires to be remanded to the Customs House, Tuticorin, who is directed to process the refund claims in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed by way of remand to the Customs House, Tuticorin, when the refund claims have been filed within the time and it also conforms all other legal requirements, the rejection by the Refund Processing Aut....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 8. Reading of the impugned order indicates that the petitioner has been castigated for not filing the fresh refund claim by placing reliance of Section 27 (1-B)(b) as per which where the duty become refundable as a consequence of any judgment, decree or order or direction of the appellate authority, appellate tribunal or any Court, the limitation of one year shall be computed from the date of such judgment, decree, order or direction. The writ petition is opposed by the respondent primarily on the ground that the petitioner has an alternate remedy before the Tribunal under Section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellate Commissioner has not dealt with the merits of the claims otherwise in the impugned order. 9. I have considered ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ms Act. "Section27. Claim for refund of duty.- 1.Any person claiming refund of any duty or interest, - (a) paid by him; or (b) borne by him, may make an application in such form and manner as may be prescribed for such refund to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs or Deputy Commissioner of Customs, before the expiry of one year, from the date of payment of such duty or interest: 13. Thus, the refund claim has to be filed within one year from the date of payment of such duty or interest. In this case, after the customs duty was paid at at the time of import between March 2011 to November 2011, the petitioner was to comply the requirements of Notification No.102/2007-Cus dated 14.09.2007. 14. The limitation ....