SC Admits Appeal on Customs Refund Denied for Unchallenged Self-Assessment

Case Details: Commissioner of Customs, Chennai VII vs. Ingram Micro India Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 37 Centax 88 (S.C.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Abhay S. Oka & Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.
• Ms Nisha Bagchi, Sr. Advocate, Ms Satya Jha, Ms Priyanka Das, Ms Shaurya Rai, Mr Durga Dutt, Advocates & Mr Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR, for the Appellant.
• Ms Umang Motiyani, Ms Nitum Jain, Ms Neha Choudhary, Mr Ayush Agarwal, Advocates & Ms Charanya Lakshmikumaran, AOR, for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The appellant challenged the decision of the CESTAT, which denied a refund of customs duty on the ground that the importer had accepted self-assessment of the bills of entry and had not disputed the assessment by filing an appeal or submitting a letter of protest. It had further held that refund claims filed after the prescribed period of limitation were barred where the importer had neither challenged the self-assessment nor raised any protest at the time of payment of duty. The matter was accordingly placed before the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Held

The Supreme Court, after condoning the delay, admitted the appeals for hearing. It was noted that the principal issue for consideration was the sustainability of refund claims filed without challenging the self-assessment of the bill of entry, as decided by the Tribunal. The Court also admitted for examination the connected classification issues relating to IP phones without video-calling capability and Non-carrier/Enterprise Ethernet Switches, for determining eligibility for customs duty exemptions under the relevant notifications. The appeals were directed to be heard along with connected matters, with all issues kept open for final adjudication.