Case Details: Principal Commissioner of Customs Versus Venus Apparels (2025) 30 Centax 220 (S.C.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- B.V. Nagarathna & Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.
- S/Shri Rupesh Kumar, Sr. Adv., S. Dwarakanath, A.S.G., Sarthak Karol, Bhuvan Kapoor, Vivek Gupta, Rajat Vaishnaw, Advs. & Gurmeet Singh Makker, AOR, for the Petitioner.
- S/Shri Ajay Aggarwal, Vishnu Kant & Naveen Bindal, Advs., for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The Revenue issued show cause notices (SCNs) to the respondent-assessee demanding recovery of excess duty drawback after a delay of about five to ten years. The respondent’s problem was that such a long delay caused hardship and uncertainty, as they were required to repay amounts many years after the original transactions, without any justification for the delay. The respondent submitted before the High Court that Rule 16 of the Customs, Central Excise Duties and Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995 does not specify any time limit for issuance of recovery notices.
Since no limitation period is prescribed, it is recognized that recovery proceedings should be initiated within an implied reasonable time to ensure fairness and avoid indefinite liability. The High Court referred to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Asia Exporters (2024) 21 Centax 170 (S.C.) which held that in cases where no statutory time limit exists, a reasonable period of three years applies. Since the Revenue issued the SCNs well beyond this reasonable time frame, the High Court held the notices to be barred by delay and laches and quashed them. The Revenue challenged this decision by filing a Special Leave Petition (SLP).
Supreme Court Held
The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that the Revenue’s Special Leave Petition lacked merit and dismissed it, affirming the High Court’s ruling. It observed that even without an explicit statutory limitation under Rule 16, recovery actions must be taken within a reasonable time, generally three years.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Venus Apparels v. Principal Commissioner — (2025) 30 Centax 219 (P&H) — Affirmed [Paras ]
List of Cases Cited
- Union of India v. Asia Exporters — (2024) 21 Centax 170 (S.C.) — Relied [Para 2]
