Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Classic Automation vs Kolkata-Ii on 23 April, 2025
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,
KOLKATA
REGIONAL BENCH - COURT NO.2
Customs Appeal No. 75071 of 2025
(Arising out of Order-in-Appeal No. Kol/Cus(CCP)/KS/546/2024 dated 12.09.2024
passed by Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), Kolkata).
M/s Classic Automation,
(Plot No. 60, Sub-Division 25, Metal Box Compound,
Nit Faridaba,d Haryana-121001.)
...Appellant
VERSUS
Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata,
(15/1, Strand Road, Kolkata-700001.)
.. ...Respondent
APPERANCE :
Mr. Rishi Raju, Advocate for the Appellant Shri Tariq Suleman, Authorized Representative for the Respondent CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. R. MURALIDHAR, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) FINAL ORDER No.76001/2025 DATE OF HEARING : 23.04.2025 DATE OF DECISION : 23.04.2025 PER R. Muralidhar :
Appellants have exported their goods on 30.8.2017. In the Shipping Bill under the drawback column, the appellant has by mistake given the Serial Number as 8439A instead of 8439B. Since no drawback was required to be given under 8439A, Department did not sanction any drawback to the appellant.
2. The appellant, after noticing the mistake, has asked customs officials to rectify and amend the Shipping Bill. Vide letter No. 2105 dated 12.01.2019, the amendment has been carried out. As per the amendment, the existing 8439A should be read and amended as 8439B.
2
Customs Appeal No. 75071 of 2025
3. A copy of this amendment sheet/Certificate of Manual Amendment, was also forwarded to the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Customs, drawback cell CC (P), WB Kolkata for information and necessary action by the Superintendent of Customs. The appellant submits that even after this amendment, the refund was not granted by the authorities. After regular follow-up with them, the appellant filed a Writ Petition before the Hon'ble High Court of Kolkata on 27.09.2023. They submitted that the delay in clearance of refund was only due to glitches in the Government portal. On 4.12.2023, the Hon'ble High Court directed the proper officer of customs to decide the refund application manually in the absence of amended electronic shipping bill.
4. After this, the Assistant Commissioner granted the refund on 16.01.2024 without granting any interest towards the delayed payment of refund. The matter came up before the Hon'ble High Court on 12-04- 2024, wherein it directed that interest may be provided as per law. After this, the appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) against the OIO dated 16.01.2024, wherein the refund was granted. Commissioner (Appeals), vide the impugned order dated 12.09.2024, has held that the appellant should have approached the adjudicating authority for demanding interest and dismissed the appeal. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before the Tribunal. 3
Customs Appeal No. 75071 of 2025
5. The Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant takes me through the chronological events of this case, which is reproduced in the form of Table given below:
LIST OF DATES Date Description Pg. No. The appellant exported certain goods to Bangladesh on 18-32 payment of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) under 30.08.2017 cover of an invoice and shipping bill. The shipping bill is considered as the refund application for tax paid on exports in terms of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
An order of rectification was passed, wherein, the appellant 23 had applied for an amendment of the shipping bill under 12.01.2019 Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962, to correct an error in the claim of drawback of duty of Customs.
Section 149 of the Customs Act was amended to incorporate March 2021 electronic amendment of documents instead of manual amendments.
On multiple occasions, the appellant approached the proper 24 2022-2023 officers under the Customs law for clearance of refund, but to no avail.
The Commissioner of Customs informed the Deputy Director, 25 Directorate General of Systems & Data Management through an internal communication that the appellant's refund was 29.04.2023 not cleared due to a technical difficulty. The government portal failed to recognize the manually amended shipping bill, resulting in delay in refund sanction.
The Hon'ble High Court at Calcutta, in Writ Petition No. 22108 26-27 of 2023 filed by the appellant, recorded that the delay in 27.09.2023 clearance of refund was only due to the Government portal, and no fault was attributable to the appellant. The Deputy Director filed an affidavit before the Hon'ble 05.10.2023 Court.
The Hon'ble High Court directed the proper officer of Customs 28-29 04.12.2023 to decide the refund application manually, in absence of the amended electronic shipping bill.
The Assistant Commissioner of Customs granted the entire 32-36 refund of tax paid on export of goods through the impugned 16.01.2024 Order-in-Original No. 04/2023-24. However, the officer failed to disburse the interest on the delayed sanction of refund of tax paid on exports.
12.04.2024 Hon'ble High Court disposed the matter, and ordered that 30-31 interest to be provided as per law 16.04.2024 Appellant preferred an appeal against part of the order-in-
original dated 16.01.2024, till the extend of not providing interest on delayed refund of tax / duty 12.09.2024 Commissioner (Appeals) passed the Impugned Order-in- 12-17 Appeal, wherein, the appeal of the appellant was rejected. On the ground that the appellant ought to have approached the adjudicating authority for demand of interest on delayed refund.
Being aggrieved with the same, the present appeal has been preferred.
4
Customs Appeal No. 75071 of 2025
6. He submits that on 12.01.2019, the amendment was allowed and a copy of this manual amendment was also forwarded to the concerned Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Customs drawback cell by the amendment issuing authority. In spite of having the information about the amendment, the customs officials have not released the refund amount. The appellant was put to a lot of financial difficulties since in spite of their follow-up, the refund was not getting granted. The appellant had to take the recourse to filing a Writ Petition before the Hon. High Court of Kolkata on 27.09.2023. Only after the order was passed by the Hon. High Court on 4.02.2023, the Assistant Commissioner has finally granted the drawback amount on 16.01.2024. The adjudicating authority has not granted any interest. This point was brought to the notice of the Hon. High Court and on 12.04.2024 the Hon. High Court disposed of the matter and ordered the interest to be provided as per law.
7. Since the order granting the refund was already passed by the OIO by the adjudicating authority, the appellant filed their appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) seeking interest on the refund already granted. Instead of taking any decision about the interest to be paid the Commissioner (Appeals) has simply dismissed the appeal on the ground that the appellant should have approached the adjudicating authority for seeking the interest. The Learned Counsel that submits that Commissioner (Appeals) is in error in rejecting their appeal.
8. Based on the above factual details, the Learned Counsel prays that the present appeal may be allowed and direction may be given to the adjudicating authority to grant the interest for the refund already granted to the appellant. 5
Customs Appeal No. 75071 of 2025
9. The AR appearing on behalf of the Revenue submits that the initial Shipping Bill filed by the appellant carried the drawback serial number as 8439A which did not require any refund to be granted on account of drawback. Therefore, the Department was correct in not granting any drawback refund to the appellant. Subsequently, the appellant has got the amendment done. Because of this, the appellant became eligible for the drawback. However, due to the technical glitches, this amendment was never uploaded in the portal of ICEGATE, because of which the refund amount could not be processed. He submits that as soon as direction was received from the High Court, the adjudicating authority has sanctioned the refund on 16th January 2024. There was no delay in granting the refund after the order was passed by the Hon. High Court. Therefore, no interest is required to be paid. He justifies the dismissal of the appeal by the Commission (Appeals) on the ground that the High Court had directed the appellant to approach the concerned authority which in this case would be the adjudicating authority only. He prays that the present appeal may be dismissed.
10. Heard both sides. Perused the appeal papers and the submissions made by both the sides.
11. I find that due to the mistake committed by the appellant while filing the Shipping Bill on 30.8.2017, they were not granted the drawback. It is an admitted fact that on 12 January 2019, the amendment was carried out. The Amendment Sheet/Certificate of Manual Amendment is reproduced below. 6
Customs Appeal No. 75071 of 2025
12. It can be seen from the above document that copy of the same was already forwarded to the Deputy/Assistant Commissioner of Customs drawback cell by the Supdt. of Customs Export Administration. Therefore, once this amendment was within the knowledge of the 7 Customs Appeal No. 75071 of 2025 drawback cell, they should have got the Shipping Bill amended and accordingly granted the refund of drawback. The appellant has also shown several correspondence which they have undertaken during the period 2020 to 2023. Finally they had to approach the Hon'ble High Court which had passed an order directing the officer to decide the refund application manually. Only after this, the refund has been granted. Since the amendment was carried out on 12th January 2019 and it is within the knowledge of the customs officials on that day itself, I find that the interest should have been granted from that day onwards.
13. Coming to the impugned order, I find that the Commissioner (Appeals) is in error in holding that the appellant has approached a wrong authority after the order was passed by the High Court. Since the OIO granting the refund was already passed by the adjudicating authority, the appellant could not have filed any letter asking him to release the interest thereon as he has become functus officio. Therefore, the appellants have correctly followed the procedure and filed their appeal before the Commissioner (appeals). He is in error in rejecting their appeal.
14. On going through the factual matrix and the statutory provisions, I find that the appellant would be eligible for interest on the drawback from 12th January 2019. Therefore, I remand the matter to the adjudicating authority and direct him to grant the interest on the 8 Customs Appeal No. 75071 of 2025 refunded amount with effect from 12th January 2019 till 16th January 2024, the date on which the refund was already granted.
15. The appeal stands disposed of thus.
(Dictated and pronounced in the open court) Sd/-
(R. Muralidhar) Member (Judicial) T.K.