Cal. HC: Persons With Disabilities Act Shifts Focus from Their Protection to Empowerment  ||  Kerala HC to NHAI: Fix Roads Within a Week  ||  Kar. HC: Attacking Police With Petrol Bottles Amounts to Terrorist Act Under UAPA  ||  AP HC: Mere Allegation of Harassment Doesn't Attract S.306 IPC  ||  Delhi HC: HC Must Respect Use of Discretionary Powers By Trial Court, Can’t Play Role Of Headmaster  ||  SC Refuses To Entertain Plea Against Compulsory Bond Conditions on MBBS Candidates in Maharashtra  ||  Guj. HC: Court Must be Satisfied of Prima Facie Case Against Accused While Framing Charges  ||  SC: Can’t Dismiss Application on Ground That it Will Lead to Filling Loop Holes of Prosecution Case  ||  SC Urges Patna HC to Drop Proceedings Against Judge for Deciding POCSO Cases Within Days  ||  SC: Can't Entertain Plea to Declare Minorities at District Level    

China Steel Corporation India Pvt Ltd Vs C.C.-Ahmedabad - (Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal) (26 Jul 2022)

Extra Duty Deposit be refunded without filing of refund claim



Present appeal has been filed by China Steel Corporation India Pvt Ltd against denial of refund of Extra Duty Deposit paid by them in terms of CBEC Circular No.11/2001 relating to cases handled by Special Valuation Branch of the customs house.

The Appellant was engaged in import of 'Silicon Electrical Steel of Cold Rolled Full Hard (unannealed)' from China Steel Corporation India Pvt Ltd. Learned counsel for the appellant argued that the impugned order is non-speaking and passed without application of mind. He argued that the 1% EDD, paid by the appellant as per Circular No.11/2001-Cus during the provisional assessment of the bills of entries, is only a security deposit and not a payment of duty. He argued that since it is not a payment of duty, provision of Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 will not apply to the refund claim filed by the appellant.

The Appellants would be entitled to automatic refund of EDD without filing of application for refund under Section 27 of the Act, 1962. The High Court in case of Commissioner of Customs (Export) Chennai vs. Sayonara Exports held that, there is no need to file any refund application and the order for refund can be made suo moto.

The Appellant was not even required to file refund claim and Extra Duty Deposit (EDD) should have been refunded without filing of refund claim. In present circumstances, if and when the refund claim was filed by the Appellant cannot be treated as barred by limitation. Appeal is allowed.


Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2022 - All Rights Reserved