POKARNA LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT filed 15 Bills of Entry during April to July 2004 which were assessed. However while calculating the duty, the standard rate of CVD (Additional Customs Duty) was collected instead of concessional rate of duty available to the appellant under Notification No. , dated 1 -3 -2003. As a result there was excess appellants submitted the refund claim which have been rejected on the ground that the same were hit by limitation of time prescribed under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. Nobody is present on behalf of the appellant. However written submissions have been made and appellants are not seeking personal hearing.

(2.) IN the written submissions, the appellants have submitted that in this case it was not a case of self assessment but an assessment by the customs officer. Since the assessment was made by the customs officer and that too wrongly, the amount of duty collected was without any authority of law and therefore the limitation under Section 27 of the Customs Act would not be applicable. They rely upon the decision in the case of Atul Products Ltd. v. Union of India and Others ( : 1985 (22) E.L.T. 714 (Bom.)) and International Electronic Mfg. Co. and Others v. Union of India and Others ( : 1986 (25) E.L.T. 630 (Bom.)).

(3.) I have considered the submissions made by the appellant as well as the learned AR. I find that in the case of Anam Electrical Manufacturing Co., the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as regards refund claim as follows: