- (1.) In the instant case, some goods were imported by the respondent under three bills of entry. The claim of the respondent was that what was imported were essentially accessories and under an exemption notification no customs duty was payable in respect thereof.
(2.) The record shows that a letter dated 12th September, 1992 was written by the appellant with regard to the said import. It was stated in this letter that some discussions had taken place between the representatives of the appellant and the respondent and as the goods imported were urgently required so as to meet Export Shipment Deadline appellant was paying duty under protest at the rate proposed by the appellant herein. The request was made to release the consignment for assessment, payment of duty and early clearance.
(3.) After the goods were cleared, an application for refund of the duty paid was filed. There is a dispute between the parties as to when was the application filed. According to the respondent, the application was filed on 5th March, 1993, whereas according to the appellant the application was received in the Refund Section only on 7th April, 1993. The application bore more than one stamp and there was a dispute with regard to the date of receipt of the said application.;