Commissioner of Customs Vs MIRC Electronics Ltd. (CESTAT Chennai)
CESTAT Chennai held that refund of excess duty paid is allowable since delay in filing of bill of entry was on account of system error. Thus, appeal of revenue dismissed and refund granted by lower authority upheld.
Facts- The respondent had imported 6680 packages of Split Air Conditioners and filed four warehouse/into bond Bill of Entry for bonding of the subject goods. On 26/09/2018 around 9:45 p.m., the respondent filed four Ex-bond bills of entry though ICEGATE [‘Indian Customs Electronic Data Interchange Gateway’]. However, ICEGATE did not admit the Bills and the status of all Ex-bond Bills of Entry filed were shown as NEGATIVE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT WITH ERROR CODE:139.
Since it was late in the evening, the respondent took up the matter with the Customs Broker. They were informed that due to non-updation of bond details in the ICES (the ‘Indian Customs EDI System’), the Ex-bond Bills of Entry filed on 26.8.2018 were not accepted and showed a negative acknowledgment.
In the meanwhile, vide Notification No. 67/2018 dated 26.9.2018, the duty payable structure on the split air-conditioners were enhanced from 10% of BCD to 20% BCD with effect from 27.10.2018. The respondent was required to pay duty on the imported split air conditioners under the above structure. The extra duty under the new notification worked out to Rs.42,89,795/-. On a bonafide belief, based on the communication of the Assistant Commissioner (Bonds) dated 26.11.2018, that the excess duty would be refunded by the refund section, the respondent discharged the excess duty liability of Rs.42,89,795/-. Hence refund claims were filed for refund of the excess duty amount and the same came to be rejected by the lower authority.
