Senior India Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi)
The appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Delhi, challenged the portion of the Commissioner (Appeals)’ order dated 05.05.2022 that dismissed the appeal relating to one Bill of Entry as time-barred. The same order had also dismissed 13 other appeals on limitation, while deciding two appeals on merits. The appellant argued that the period spent before the Deputy Commissioner should be excluded while computing limitation under section 128 of the Customs Act, 1962, read with section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963. According to the appellant, the appeals concerning 14 Bills of Entry for the period from 17.09.2018 to 06.02.2019 were filed only after rejection of a refund application dated 26.08.2019, which was rejected by letter dated 08.05.2020 and received on 02.06.2020.
The Commissioner (Appeals) rejected this contention, holding that the benefit of section 14 of the Limitation Act was not available. It was noted that the refund application related only to two Bills of Entry and did not cover the 14 Bills of Entry for which exclusion of time was sought. Further, the classification of goods in respect of these 14 Bills of Entry had never been disputed within the prescribed limitation period. The appellant had raised the classification issue only on 17.04.2019, stating that goods would be classified under heading 8481 instead of 8409, but this did not amount to disputing the assessments of the earlier Bills of Entry. The Commissioner (Appeals) concluded that no proceedings concerning these 14 Bills of Entry were being prosecuted elsewhere in good faith and with due diligence, and therefore, the appeals were clearly time-barred.
