COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS Vs. DECORATIVE LAMINATES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
LAWS(CE)-1986-4-2
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on April 25,1986

Appellant
VERSUS
Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.Kalyanam, - (1.)THIS appeal is filed by the Collector of Customs, Bangalore and is directed against the Order of Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras, dated 20-12-1985 finding the refund, claim of the respondent as not barred by limitation in terms of Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'.
(2.)The respondent herein filed a claim of refund addressed to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Mysore in respect of duty paid on 14-3-83 and filed the same in the Office of the Superintendent of Central Excise, Range-C, Mysore on 12-9-83. The refund claim of the respondent was forwarded by the Superintendent to the Assistant Collector of Customs & Central Excise, I.D.O., Mysore where it was received on 23-9-1983. The Assistant Collector rejected the claim on grounds of limitation under Section 27 (1) of the Act as against which the appellant preferred by the respondent was allowed by the Collector of Customs (Appeals), Madras, under the impugned order against which the Collector of Customs, Bangalore has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal.
'The short question that arises for consideration in the present case is whether a refund claim addressed to the Assistant Collector and preferred within time but handed over to the Superintendent who received the same but transmitted it to the Office of the Assistant Collector after the expiry of the period of limitation could be said to be an application for refund within time in terms of Section 27 of the Act.

(3.)THE respondent has contended that the refund application was entertained by the jurisdictional Superintendent of Central Excise, Range 'C' Mysore on 12-9-1983 and inasmuch as the same was addressed to the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, and preferred within the period of limitation, the delay caused by the Superintendent in forwarding the same to the Assistant Collector should not jeopardise the respondent's right under law to claim refund on the grounds of limitation.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.