In my view, no useful purpose will be served by relegating the petitioner to work out the appellate remedy once again considering the”

[19/08, 07:47] Sekarreporter: http://youtube.com/post/UgkxrA5dTBU39z5ef9Rs3Q86HVaJzbQwUPv3?si=QUaoBORNPgkrBR8a
[19/08, 07:49] Sekarreporter: Customs – Refund of SAD – Notification 102/2007 Cus. Original refund claim was rejected for being filed in wrong forum. Commissioner (Appeals) also upholds the rejection. CESTAT overrules the objection and remands the matter and the original authority, who has since sanctioned the refund. Department files appeal before Commissioner Appeals on the ground that the importer should have filed fresh claim, within one year from CESTAT’s order, as per Sec. 27 (1B) (b) of the Customs Act, which is allowed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Importer files Writ Petition before the Hon’ble Madras High Court, which holds that the said Section 27 (1B) (b) would apply only for refunds arising as a consequence of such appellate orders and in this case, where the refund claim has originally been filed under Section 27 (1).
[19/08, 07:49] Sekarreporter: “For Petitioner : Mr.G.Natarajan
For Respondents : Mr.R.Nandha Kumar,
Senior Standing Counsel
ORDER
Although the petitioner has an alternate remedy before the CESTAT, I see no point in relegating the petitioner to file appeal. In my view, no useful purpose will be served by relegating the petitioner to work out the appellate remedy once again considering the”