Case Law Details
Paras Marble Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court)
Petitioner had been bonafide pursuing his claim for refund of bank guarantee which was initially filed to the Commissioner Customs, Chennai within a period of one and a half months from the date of issuance of the EODC. The application was referred back to the petitioner almost after five months later vide letter dated 30.04.2019 conveying that the refund application had to be filed before another officer. The petitioner filed the refund claim application to the concerned officer albeit not in the prescribed format whereafter, it was again returned and was filed afresh in the prescribed format. Therefore, the finding of the respondents Authority that the application for refund was time- barred is totally unwarranted. The petitioner was unquestionably prosecuting his refund claim in a bonafide manner which ought not to have thrown away on hyper-technical objection of not having been filed before the competent authority and/or not having been filed in the prescribed format and finally as being delayed.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
The instant writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner M/s. Paras Marble for challenging the order (Annexure-10) dated 16.10.2020 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Customs (Refunds-II) and to direct the respondent No.3 to decide the petitioner’s refund application afresh by treating it to be within limitation.
Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of the writ petition are noted herein below:-
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
