Order date – 13 January 2023

Parties: Komatsu India Private Limited Vs The Commissioner of Customs

Facts –

• The Appellant, Komatsu India Private Limited had imported goods separately vide 13 Bills-of-Entry and 26 Bills-of-Entry. Vide separate letters dated 27.10.2020, the appellant sought for refund of the cash security deposit.
• The Deputy Commissioner rejected the refund claimed on the ground that the appellant’s claim was barred by limitation in terms of Section 27(1) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue –

• Whether the rejection of refund of cash security deposit is in order?

Order – 

• The Tribunal relied on the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of M/s. Cable Corporation of India Ltd and held that refund claim of the security deposit is not governed by the provisions of Section 27 of the Customs Act 
• The Tribunal held that the lower authorities have clearly erred in rejecting and confirming the rejection of refund claimed of the security deposit by invoking the provisions of Section 27(1) ibid.
• The appeals stand allowed.