TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 905
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and conditions of an Equipment Supply Contract. For the purpose of such import of equipment, the appellants have filed seven Bills of Entry (B/Es) during 17.10.1997 to 24.04.1998 with the Customs appraising group VA and two B/Es on 28.11.1997 and 09.01.1998 before EPCG appraising group in the Commissionerate of Customs, New Custom House, Mumbai. Since the imports were from related party, the assessments were carried out by the customs authorities provisionally pending determination of influence of relationship on the declared assessable value in respect of import of goods supplied by foreign supplier to the appellants, under Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of Imported goods) Rules, 1988 [herein after, referred to as, "CVR of 1988", for short] read with Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962. The goods were allowed clearance on provisional assessment basis by the customs authorities on execution of provisional duty bond along with security/bank guarantee and upon payment of 1% to 5% of declared assessable value as Extra Duty Deposit (EDD) by the appellants in terms of Circular No.1/1998 dated 01.01.1998 and the earlier instructions issued by the Central Board of Excise & Cust....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....such order of the Commissioner (Appeals) before the Tribunal, by an order dated 23.01.2002, the appeal was dismissed, on the ground that the Review order in this case was passed after lapse of the prescribed period of one year under Section 129D of the Customs Act, 1962, and hence such review order was treated as non-est. Considering that the department had not sanctioned refund of EDD, the appellants had approached before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition No.1149/2003. In the judgement dated 07.09.2004, by referring to the Customs Reference No.1 of 2004, the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay allowed the WP to be withdrawn by the appellants-importer and Revenue was permitted to withdraw the amount deposited/EDD by appellants, pursuant to the order of this Court along with accrued interest. Further, the appeal was restored to the file of the Tribunal for fresh hearing and decision on merits of the case. In the Order No. A/465/WZB/06-C.III(CSTB) dated 08.06.2006 passed by the Tribunal, by upholding the order dated 02.01.2001 passed by the Commissioner (Appeal), the Tribunal had rejected the appeal filed by Revenue. Since the refund of EDD was not sanctioned by the departme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o. A/641642/15/ CB dated 07.01.2015 had held that the incidence of revenue deposit has not been passed on to any other person and thus remanded the matter back to the original authority for deciding on the refund claim. This was also followed by another Order No. M/2635/L5/CB dated 18.05.2015 for rectifying the mistake in mentioning of two amounts of refund claim arising from 7 B/Es and 2 B/Es. In pursuance of this order of the Tribunal, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Gr.VA, NCH, Mumbai vide order-in-original dated 13.11.2015 had sanctioned the refund claim for an amount of Rs.96,42,224/- in favour of the appellants. Similarly, the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, EPCG Group, NCH, Mumbai vide order-in-original dated 06.11.2015 had sanctioned the refund claim for an amount of Rs.74,23,079/- in favour of the appellants. However, no interest was paid on such refund claims sanctioned to the appellants. In the appeal preferred by the appellants against the orders of the original authority dated 13.11.2015 & 06.11.2015, the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) vide orders dated 28.09.2017 & 27.09.2017, respectively, remanded the matter back to the original authority for deciding t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns contained in the Customs Act, 1962 and the rules/regulations made thereunder as it existed during relevant point of time of the dispute and the relevant facts evidenced through various orders, documents dealing with the issue, for coming to a proper conclusion about the subject issues of determination referred above. Customs Act, 1962 "Definitions. Section 2.- In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,- (2) "assessment" includes provisional assessment, re-assessment and any order of assessment in which the duty assessed is nil; (15) "duty" means a duty of customs leviable under this Act; (24) "value", in relation to any goods, means the value thereof determined in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) of Section 14; Valuation of goods for purposes of assessment. Section 14.-(1) For the purposes of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975) or any other law for the time being in force whereunder a duty of customs is chargeable on any goods by reference to their value, the value of such goods shall be deemed to be the price at which such or like goods are ordinarily so....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h entry or document or any information so furnished is not true in respect of any matter relevant to the assessment, the goods may, without prejudice to any other action which may be taken under this Act, be reassessed to duty. (5) Where any assessment done under sub-section (2) is contrary to the claim of the importer or exporter regarding valuation of goods, classification, exemption or concessions of duty availed consequent to any notification therefor under this Act, and in cases other than those where the importer or the exporter, as the case may be, confirms his acceptance of the said assessment in writing, the proper officer shall pass a speaking order within fifteen days from the date of assessment of the bill of entry or the shipping bill, as the case may be." Provisional assessment of duty Section 18. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act but without prejudice to the provisions contained in section 46- (a) where the proper officer is satisfied that an importer or exporter is unable to produce any document or furnish any information necessary for the assessment of duty on the imported goods or the export goods, as t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he same shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (2): Provided further that the limitation of one year or six months, as the case may be, shall not apply where any duty and interest, if any, paid on such duty has been paid under protest : Provided also that in the case of goods which are exempt from payment of duty by a special order issued under sub-section (2) of section 25, the limitation of one year or six months, as the case may be, shall be computed from the date of issue of such order: Provided also that where the duty becomes refundable as a consequence of judgment, decree, order or direction of the appellate authority, Appellate Tribunal or any court, the limitation of one year or six months, as the case may be, shall be computed from the date of such judgment, decree, order or direction. Explanation I.-For the purposes of this sub-section, "the date of payment of duty and interest, if any, paid on such duty", in relation to a person, other than the importer, shall be construed as "the date of purchase of goods" by such person. Explanation II.-Where any duty is paid provisionally under section 18, the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....immediately after the expiry of three months from the date of receipt of such application till the date of refund of such duty :..." Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations, 1963 Notification No. 181-Cus., dated 13th July, 1963. "In exercise of the powers conferred by section 157 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), read with section 18 of the said Act, the Central Board of Revenue makes the following regulations, namely: 1.Short title.- These regulations may be called the Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations, 1963. 2. Conditions for allowing provisional assessment.- Where the proper officer on account of any of the grounds specified in subsection (1) of section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), is not able to make a final assessment of the duty on the imported goods or the export goods, as the case may be, he shall make an estimate of the duty that is most likely to be levied hereinafter referred to as the provisional duty. If the importer or the exporter, as the case may be, executes a bond in an amount equal to the difference between the duty that may be finally assessed and the provisional duty ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....toms port, Customs airport, land customs station or the warehouse where the duty of customs was paid. (2) The application shall be scrutinised for its completeness by the Proper Officer and if the application is found to be complete in all respects, the applicant shall be issued an acknowledgement by the Proper Officer in the prescribed Form appended to these regulations within ten working days of the receipt of the application. (3) Where on scrutiny, however, the application is found to be incomplete, the Proper Officer shall, within ten working days of its receipt, return the application to the applicant, pointing out the deficiencies. The applicant may resubmit the application after making good the deficiencies, for scrutiny. Explanation . - For the purposes of payment of interest under section 27A of the Act, the application shall be deemed to have been received on the date on which a complete application, as acknowledged by the Proper Officer, has been made." 5.2 At the outset, it is also made clear that in the above appeals the disputed period pertains to pre-introduction of 'self-assessment' concept under the definition clause of 'assessment' in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... In terms of extant CBEC instructions, the provisional assessments must be finalized expeditiously, well within 6 months. However, in cases involving machinery contracts or large project imports, where imports take place over long period, such finalization may take more time. Here too, CBEC directs the customs field formations that efforts should be made to finalize the cases within 6 months of the date of import of the last consignment covered by the contract. [Refer CBEC Instructions F.No.512/5/72-Cus.VI, dated 23-4-1973 and F.No.511/7/77-Cus.VI, dated 9-I-1978 and Circular No. 17/2011-Cus., dated 8-4-2011]. 6.3 In terms of the CBEC's instructions vide F.No.512/5/72-Cus.VI dated 23.04.1973 and F.No.511/7/77-Cus.VI. dated 09.01.1978, the provisional assessments must be finalized expeditiously, well within 6 months. Thus, it could be inferred that even though there is no specific time limit prescribed in the Regulations of 1963/2011, either for submission of documents by the importer or for finalizing the provisional assessment by the proper officer of customs, the endeavour of the department is to obtain finalization of provisionally assessed duties at the earliest as may be....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... etc. 2. On the basis of this review, the Board has taken the following decisions : xxx xxx xxx xxx 8. The amount of extra duty deposit presently kept at 5% of the value of the goods should henceforth be reduced to 1% of the value. 9. Furthermore, where provisional assessment is being resorted to, the investigation and finalisation of the assessment should be completed within three months of the registration of the case in the SVB of the designated Custom House. If no decision is given within 4 months of the registration of the case, the obtaining of the extra duty deposit should be discontinued. The time- frame for finalisation of investigation should be strictly adhered to irrespective of whether the importer has furnished all the required information or not. 10. As regards the cases pending with the SVB of various Custom Houses pending as on 30-4-1997, steps should be taken to complete the investigation and have the issues finally settled by 28th February, 1998. All the concerned Chief Commissioners and Commissioners are requested to put in extra efforts by way of re-deploying officers to achieve this target. As for cases registered f....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h have a bearing on the assessable value. Detailed instructions were issued vide Circular Nos. 1/98 - Customs dated 1.1.98 and 11/2001-Customs dated 23.2.2001, prescribing the procedure to be observed by the Custom Houses for referring cases to Special Valuation Branches and time lines to be followed for finalising such cases. 2. However, trade and industry has been repeatedly representing regarding delays in finalisation of SVB investigations, continued uncertainty due to provisional assessments, increase in transaction costs due to extra duty deposits and burdensome procedure of renewal of SVB orders. Board has also taken cognizance of the WCO's Guide to Customs Valuation and Transfer Pricing (June 2015) and the fact that the circulars 1/98 and 11/2001 were based upon the Customs Valuation (Determination of Price of imported goods), Rules, 1988, which have since been superseded by the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Imported Goods) Rules, 2007. Accordingly, after considering the above and the large number of SVB investigations pending in various Customs Houses, a need has been felt to streamline the procedures relating to investigations by SVBs. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d to be initially furnished by the importer is attached as Annexure D. The form of Bond to be used in a case where taking a Security Deposit becomes necessary is attached as Annexure E. 3.3 It has also been decided that the existing system of adjudication, wherein the proper officer of the SVB passed an appealable order followed by the assessing officer passing another corresponding order finalizing provisional assessments should be replaced. It has now been decided that the SVB shall not issue an appealable order. Instead, the SVB shall convey its investigative findings by way of an Investigation Report to the referring customs formation for finalizing the provisional assessments. This would obviate multiple streams of appeals for the trade. 8.2 On careful perusal of the above along with statutory provisions of Customs Act, 1962, it clearly transpires that the term "duty" refers to the duties of customs leviable under Section 14 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with the Customs Tariff Act, 1975; whereas, the term "Extra Duty Deposit" (EDD) refers to the deposit of certain prescribed percentage of declared assessable value, pending submission of documents in respect of rel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he importers the requirement of payment of EDD is dispensed with by CBEC, while continuing the imports under SVB to be assessed under provisional assessment. Therefore, it also transpires from the above, that payment of EDD is for a specific time period, during the pendency of provisional assessment on account of SVB investigation, and it is only for the purpose of submitting the requisite information by the importer for determination of duty that is finally to be assessed by the proper officer of customs under Section 18 ibid. At the most EDD can be kept as reserve or 'advance' being in the nature of 'deposit' which is obtained by Revenue as an 'extra amount', which could be adjusted with the duty finally determined (on account of valuation of related party transaction), in case the security obtained during provisional assessment is insufficient and the importer had not paid the differential amount due on account of finalization of provisional assessment. Even though, such deposits made in the form of EDD may be available for adjustment against the deficiency of finally determined duty, in the context of present case where in comparison to the provisionally assessed duty paid ther....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tatement and declarations made in their various letters to this branch. In case, there is any factual error or omission in declarations, the same should immediately be brought to this Branch. These decisions will remain in force till the existing collaboration/ agency/ distribution/ agreement/ arrangements and present method of invoicing or pricing remain unchanged. Any change affecting the invoice value materially should be intimated to this branch without delay. This decision is subject to occasional review/for a final review after a period of 3 years. These decisions shall be review after a period of 3 years. These decisions shall be reviewed as and when information additional or contrary to what is stated is available." 8.4 The above order finalizing the aspect of valuation of imported goods for the purpose of determining the relationship having influenced the transaction value or otherwise, was reviewed by the department and the same was appealed against by the department and was also agitated before the Tribunal and Hon'ble High Court of Bombay for long period till the refund amount was sanctioned to the appellants vide Order dated 06.11.2015 and 13.11.2015. There....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the aforesaid provisions and to streamline the procedure for processing of refund applications the Customs Refund Application (Form) Regulations, 1995 have been prescribed by the Board in terms of Notification No. 34/95(N.T.) Customs, dated 26-5-1995. These regulations supersede the Customs Application (Form) Regulations, 1991. 3. The new regulations provide for the form and manner in which an application of refund is to be made. As may be seen, the regulations also provide for the scrutiny of an application and its return to the applicant within a period of 10 working days, if it is found incomplete in any manner or detail. If however, the application is found to be complete in all respects for the purpose of processing the refund claim the same is to be acknowledged within the period of 10 working days. The interest free period of 3 months for processing the claim will be deemed to start from the date of receipt of the complete refund application. 4. The afore indicated provisions warrant that the Department is geared to meet the new standards required by law as the payment of interest by the Government in cases of delayed settlement of refund cases would be d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nspires the said legal provision mandates the Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Customs, on receipt of refund claim application, to satisfy himself whether the whole of any part of the duty or interest paid by the applicant is refundable or otherwise, and if refundable then credit such amount to the consumer welfare fund or pay the amount of refund to the applicant if the unjust enrichment angle is fulfilled. The Customs Refund Application (Form) Regulations, 1995 issued vide Notification No.34/95-Customs dated 26.05.1995 as amended in terms of powers vested with the Board vide Section 157(2)(aa) ibid, provide for the form and manner of filing application for refund under Section 27 ibid. The prescribed proforma for submission of refund claim is given in Part-A and Part-B which is to be filed by the claimant of refund; and the proper officer of customs, within ten days of its receipt, upon scrutiny, shall point out deficiency, if any, and return the application to the applicant/claimant for re-submitting the refund claim application after making good the deficiencies, as per prescribed proforma in Part-C. On perusal of the case records, it is found that the appellants importer had s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....em. Further, in terms of the legal provision of Section 27 ibid as prevalent at the relevant time, a person could claim refund of duty, which was paid by him in pursuance of an order of assessment, by making an refund application. In the factual matrix of the present case, even though an application for refund was made before the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Appraising Group VA and EPCG, the effective order of assessment upon finalization of provisional assessment, initiating the clock for refund claim had arisen only on account of passing of Orders-in-Original dated 26.03.2008 & 22.05.2008. Therefore, we are of the view the application for refund could be effective only from that date, on which the two orders were passed for refund of the amount of EDD not being required to be adjusted after finally agreeing to the fact that correct amount of duty to be paid on the imports was already paid by the appellants at the stage of initial import itself. Thus, the period for which interest on delayed refund, if any, would start from the expiry of three months from the respective date of the orders of original authority determining the amount refundable to the applicant, thus enabling....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....funded to the appellants importer, once a speaking order was passed on 13.11.2015 and 06.11.2015 in terms of the legal provisions of the Customs statute for accepting the declared value as transaction value, in finally assessing the duty liability. 9.1 Besides the above, we also find that the department had subsequently issued Public Notice No. 5/2012, dated 17-01-2012 for handling the matters of refund of duty, particularly between Centralized Section and Appraising groups, Refund for avoiding inconveniences to the trade and industry. The extract of the said PN is given below: "Refund in case of Amendments to Bill of Entry 1. Difficulty has been expressed by Trade to get the refund in the matter where Bills of Entry are to be finalised prior to sanction of refund, for example in the case of appellate orders revising assessments already finalized etc. In such cases Refund Section, on receipt of refund claims, issues deficiency memo to importer for producing re-assessed Bill of Entry or amendment certificate. 2. In order to address the inconvenience caused to Trade, in cases of the refund as above, following steps should be taken by the Refund Section. : ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of assessment enabling refund of EDD. 9.2 The various cases in which the matter of refund of EDD and interest for delay in refund beyond the prescribed time limit was dealt with by various judicial forum supports our above view. The relevant extract of the judgements passed by the Hon'ble High Court/Tribunal are given below: (1) Assistant Commissioner of Customs (Refunds), Chennai Vs. Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. reported in (2025) 31 Centax 343 (Mad.) in W.A.No. 1084 of 2020 and C.M.P.No. 13255 of 2020, decided on 2-12-2020 "8. The alleged reason assigned by the Department that there was some investigation pending of which no details are placed on record, is not at all a justifiable reason in the light of Board's own Circular as quoted by the learned Single Judge. No such material has been placed before this court to justify the action of the Customs Department not to finalise the Provisional Assessment for 16 years and even by now to keep the EDD a mere Security Deposit by Importer/ Petitioner with them like this. 9. The direction of the learned Single Judge, is, therefore, perfectly justified and does not call for any interference by this court ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The provisions under Section 18(1) and 18(2) could have been followed and refund would have been granted automatically after completion of final assessment and cancellation of PD bonds. In coming to that conclusion, he relied on two judgments of the Tribunal at Bangalore and Chennai and thus the order of the assessing authority was set aside and a direction was issued to refund the money. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee preferred an appeal to the Tribunal. The Tribunal agreed with the said reasoning, dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved of the said order, the revenue is before this court in appeal. 5. From the aforesaid facts it is clear that, the refund is not sought for the excise duty paid in excess of what was payable under law. The refund was sought in respect of the additional value insisted upon by the department being the value of technical knowhow and royalty. It was added to the excise duty payable. When the assessee authority held that the customs duty paid by the assessee was proper and no additional duty need be paid, they were under an obligation to refund this additional amount which was collected, which had no basis. In such circumstances, Section 27 is not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the petitioner is to be refunded back only after the Bill of Entries filed are finally assessed and assessment is completed. Needless to state, such refund will be subject to the petitioner satisfying that there will be no unjust enrichment on account of refund in terms of Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. 18. That apart, it is submitted that the impugned order is also in gross violation of principles of natural justice as the petitioner's reply dated 22.04.2021 has not been considered while passing the impugned order. 19. Under these circumstances, the impugned order is set aside with consequential relief. The respondents are directed to complete the proceedings within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order." 9.3 We also find that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. Vs. Union of India - 1997 (89) E.L.T. 247 (S.C.) have not dealt with the refund of EDD, as they had dealt with in the said case three types of levy of duty i.e. unconstitutional levy of duty, duty levied under erroneous interpretation of law and duty levied under mistake of law. Therefore, we are unable to take guidance from....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion) applies only to provisional assessment made after 14-08-2018; hence, in the case at hand it cannot be applied on the provisional assessments of the 4 Bill of Entries as they are made in the year 2012. The limitation for finalization to the case at hand would be governed by Para 3.1 of the CBIC Instruction as per which the finalization of provisional assessment is to be made expeditiously, well within 6 months whereas in the instant case the finalization is done after 6 years to 9 years." When the department was aggrieved with the said judgement of the Hon'ble Jharkhand High Court and filed a Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 55454/2024 before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the same was dismissed both on the grounds of delay as well as on merits. ITEM NO.16 COURT NO. 8 SECTION XVII SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL ) DIARY NO (S). 55454/2024 [ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER DATED 04-03-2024 IN WPT NO. 5161/2022 04-03-2024 IN WPT NO. 4340/2022 PASSED BY THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI] UNION OF INDIA & ORS. PETITIONER (S) VERSUS ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se of Bihar Foundry & Castings Ltd. including the issue regarding the requirement of finalizing the provisional assessment within prescribed time period, have attained finality. 9.5 In this regard, we find that the CBEC Circular No. 05/2016-Customs dated 09.02.2016, even though issued in the subsequent period, provides guidance, as it prescribes the procedure for investigation of related party transactions in import cases, and states that where the declared value is found to be acceptable as transaction value, then there would be no need to issue a speaking order for finalising the provisional assessments in such cases. The relevant paragraph of the said circular is extracted and given below: "Finalisation of assessments 9. Upon receipt of the IR from the SVB, where investigative findings are that the declared value is found conforming to Rule 3 of the CVR, 2007, the customs stations where provisional assessments have been undertaken shall immediately proceed to finalize the same. There would be no need to issue a speaking order for finalising the provisional assessments in such cases..." 9.6 From the above, it is clear that the appellants importer in the pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....terest becomes payable under Section 11BB of the Act. Manifestly, interest under Section 11BB of the Act becomes payable, if on an expiry of a period of three months from the date of receipt of the application for refund, the amount claimed is still not refunded. Thus, the only interpretation of Section 11BB that can be arrived at is that interest under the said Section becomes payable on the expiry of a period of three months from the date of receipt of the application under Sub-section (1) of Section 11B of the Act and that the said Explanation does not have any bearing or connection with the date from which interest under Section 11BB of the Act becomes payable. 10. It is a well settled proposition of law that a fiscal legislation has to be construed strictly and one has to look merely at what is said in the relevant provision; there is nothing to be read in; nothing to be implied and there is no room for any intendment. [See: Cape Brandy Syndicate Vs. Inland Revenue Commissioners - (1921) 1 KB 64 and Ajmera Housing Corporation & Anr. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax. (2010) 8 SCC 739]. 11. At this juncture, it would be apposite to extract a Circular dated 1st Oc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) E.L.T. T16] wherein Board has directed that responsibility should be fixed for not disposing of the refund/rebate claims within three months from the date of receipt of application. Accordingly, jurisdictional Commissioners may devise a suitable monitoring mechanism to ensure timely disposal of refund/rebate claims. Whereas all necessary action should be taken to ensure that no interest liability is attracted, should the liability arise, the legal provision for the payment of interest should be scrupulously followed." (Emphasis supplied) 12. Thus, ever since Section 11BB was inserted in the Act with effect from 26th May 1995, the department has maintained a consistent stand about its interpretation. Explaining the intent, import and the manner in which it is to be implemented, the Circulars clearly state that the relevant date in this regard is the expiry of three months from the date of receipt of the application under Section 11B(1) of the Act. xxx xxx xxx xxx 14. At this stage, reference may be made to the decision of this Court in Shreeji Colour Chem Industries (supra), relied upon by the Delhi High Court. It is evident from a bare reading of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... importer. These are self-evident from the relevant extracts of these orders as given below: Extract of Order-in-Original dated 26.03.2008 of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Appraising Group VA for refund of EDD for an amount of Rs. 96,42,224/- "16. Importer also submitted the extracts of Balance Sheets for the year 1999-2006 to show that incidence of duty has not been passed on to the Consumer. They have stated that the entire deposit amount so paid by them has been booked as deposit amount in their financial records. They have further stated that they have shown the provisions of deposit amount under loans and advances in each year's Balance Sheet. 17. On scrutiny on the Balance Sheet submitted by the importer. It is seen that under the head Balances / Deposits with Government Authorities as on 31.03.1999, the amount shown is 14.20 Crores and Balance as on 31.03.1998 is 5.85 Crores. From this it cannot be inferred that Revenue Deposit, deposited with Customs Authority (and now claimed as refund amount of RS.96,42,224/-) has been included in the schedule 10 of the Balance Sheet. The break-up of the amount due with the Customs Authorities is not shown se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s of entry. Out of 9 bills of entry two bills of entry pertains to EPCG Section and 7 bills of entry pertain to Gr. VA....... 30. It has also been verified from" The Pay & Accounts Office, 9th Floor, NCH, Mumba" vide their office letter F. No. PAO/Exp/2015-16/1057 dated 01.10.2015, stating that, as the order in original bearing number 792/AC/Gr.VA/RG/2007-08 dated 26.03.2008 in r/o M/s Vardhaman Acrylics Ltd. for creating the amount to Consumer Welfare Fund was not forwarded to their office, refund amount of Rs. 96,42,224/- of M/s Vardhaman Acrylics Ltd. has not yet been credited to Consumer Welfare Fund. In view of the above, I pass the following order: ORDER I, sanction the refund claim of Rupees Ninety-Six Lakhs Forty Two Thousand Two Hundred Twenty Four Only (96,42,224/-), Vardhaman Acrylics Limited, 504, Dalamal House Nariman Point, Mumbai 21, deposited by them vide RD. No. mentioned above against the respective bills entry." Extract of Order-in-Original dated 22.05.2008 of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Appraising Group EPCG for refund of EDD for an amount of Rs. 74,23,079/- "10. I have gone through the facts of the case on re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ount of Rs. 74,23,079/- "28.......I have checked and verified the original Accounts Ledger of "Other recoverable" and found it to be correct as mentioned in the Balance Sheet and break-up of Advances Recoverable as stated above. All the above stated detailed analysis establishes that Revenue Deposit amounting to Rs.1,70,65,303/- has been carried forward from the year 1997-98 & 1998-1999 and no amount thereof has been capitalized in the Books of Account and it is standing as recoverable under the head "Loans & Advances" till date. I have verified all the documents/records like journal vouchers, account ledgers, sub-groupings & audited balance sheets etc. and I find that the incidence of the Revenue Deposit has been borne by the Company as the same has not been passed on by them and therefore, granting of refund of the said Revenue Deposit will not enrich them unjustly. xxx xxx xxx xxx 30. It has also been verified from, "The Pay & Accounts Office, 9th Floor, NCH, Mumbai" vide their office letter dated 14.09.2015, F.No. PAO/REV/CWF/2015-16/990, stating that, as the order in original bearing no. S/40-EPCG-14/1998 dated 22.05.2008 and refund order no....