No Interest If Duty Delay Due to System Glitch | HC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

Section 47 Customs interest waiver
Case Details: Grain Energy Pvt. Ltd. Versus Deputy Commissioner, Customs, ICD, Jodhpur (2025) 29 Centax 425 (Raj.)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • Dr. Pushpendra Singh Bhati & Chandra Prakash Shrimali, JJ.
  • Ms Priyanka Rathi with Shri Chirag Mathur, for the Petitioner.
  • Shri Rajvendra Sarswat, for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner, an importer engaged in the clearance of goods under the Customs Act, 1962, filed the bill of entry and promptly made payment of the assessed customs duty to the authorised bank within one day of receipt of the bill. However, due to technical glitches in the functioning of the Electronic Cash Ledger (ECL) facility on the Common Portal, the amount paid by the petitioner was not reflected in the Government account within the prescribed time under Section 47 of the Customs Act, 1962. Relying solely on the delayed Government-side reflection, the Customs authorities treated the payment as belated and proceeded to levy interest on the petitioner under the said section.

The petitioner challenged the levy in Rajasthan High Court, asserting that the delay was not attributable to any default on its part, but arose due to admitted technical issues in the Government’s digital infrastructure. The petitioner placed reliance on Order No. 03/2023-Customs (NT) dated 17-04-2023 issued under the Customs (Waiver of Interest) Third Order, 2023, which acknowledged that the ECL-related system issues had been resolved only to a large extent, not entirely. Further, the petitioner produced the Advisory dated 27-07-2023 issued by the Directorate General of Systems, which categorically clarified that, for ICEGATE-registered users, the effective date of rectification of technical issues referred to in the Third Order would be 27-07-2023, thereby admitting continued systemic defects until that date.

CESTAT Held

The Hon’ble High Court held that where the assessee made timely payment to the authorised bank, any subsequent delay in credit to the Government account due to system errors cannot be attributed to the assessee. It ruled that interest under Section 47 was not leviable in such circumstances, and any interest already collected was liable to be refunded under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. The judgment reinforces that assessees cannot be penalised for procedural delays arising from acknowledged technical failures within the Government’s own infrastructure.

List of Cases Cited

List of Departmental Clarification Cited

List of Notifications Cited

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Stories
KYC Fulfilled by Verifying IEC and GSTIN | No Physical Check Needed—CESTAT

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 19, 2025

CBIC Grants BIS Exemption for Steel Imports

Customs • News • Statutory Scope

July 17, 2025

Legal Heirs Not Liable for Customs Penalty After Assessee’s Death | HC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 16, 2025

Anti-Dumping Duty on Clear Float Glass Extended till Feb 2026

Customs • News • Statutory Scope

July 15, 2025

Mobile Chargers Not Part of Phones | Taxed Separately—HC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 11, 2025

Gold Jewellery Worn by Foreign National Not Dutiable Baggage | Delhi HC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 10, 2025

Declared Value Upheld as Black Pepper Import Ban Was Conditional | CESTAT

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 9, 2025

Importer Barred from Re-Litigating Pre-Deposit Issue | Delhi HC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 8, 2025

SCN Must Precede Confiscation of Seized Sale Proceeds | HC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 8, 2025

CMDA Nod After Import Valid for STP Customs Exemption | HC

Customs • News • Case Chronicles

July 6, 2025