Obron Impex Ltd. through representative Mr Amol… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2026)

Obron Impex Ltd. through representative Mr Amol… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the Petitioner to support its refund application by placing on record any acceptable material, if available, and/or by providing a reasonable estimation, to be considered in accordance with law, provided the claim for refund otherwise subsists in law; all contentions kept open.

Issue for consideration

What, if anything, can be adjudicated in a writ petition challenging a deficiency memo returning a customs refund application, where the underlying supporting documents are unavailable, having been washed away in floods?

Court's answer

Since the documents supporting the refund claim are stated to be unavailable (washed away in floods), the Court observed that it was unclear what could be adjudicated in the present proceedings.

Ratio / Principle

The Petition was disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to support its refund application by placing on record any acceptable material, if available, and/or by providing a reasonable estimation, which may be considered in accordance with law, provided the Petitioner's claim for refund otherwise subsists in law.

Key takeaways

All contentions of the parties were kept open while disposing of the Petition.ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Customs refund — Deficiency Memo dated 04.02.2025 (DIN: 2025027700000002020C) issued by the Assistant Commissioner, CRRS, Customs returning the Petitioner's refund application dated 17.01.2025 as incomplete for non-submission of the Refund Application (Part A, B & C) in proper proforma with declaration and the original TR-6 challan copy, returned/disposed off in terms of the Customs Refund application (Form) Regulation, 1995 — Petitioner's contention: supporting documents washed away in floods and hence unavailable — Court held it unclear what could be adjudicated — Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to support its refund application by placing on record acceptable material and/or a reasonable estimation, to be considered in accordance with law, provided the claim for refund otherwise subsists in law — All contentions kept open. (High Court of Judicature at Bombay, O.O.C.J., W.P. No. 3749 of 2025, decided 10 April 2026, G. S. Kulkarni & Aarti Sathe, JJ.)

13-WP-3749-25.DOC

JYOTI RAJESH MANE

Digitally signed by JYOTI RAJESH MANE Date: 2026.04.15 15:01:36 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 3749 OF 2025

Obron Impex Ltd through representative Mr Amol Deokar ..Petitioner Versus Union of India through Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue ...Respondents

Mr. Zobin Sheth i/b. YNA Legal Advocates, for Petitioner.

Mr. Jitendra B. Mishra a/w. Abhishek Mishra, a/w. Rupesh Dubey, for Respondent.

CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & AARTI SATHE, JJ.

DATE: 10 APRIL 2026

P.C.

The present Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the Letter dated 4th February 2025 issued by the Assistant Commissioner to the Petitioner with respect to the refund claim filed by the Petitioner. A copy of the said letter is reproduced hereinbelow:

Deficiency Memo

-04-02-2025

DIN: - 2025027700000002020C

To,

YNA Legal Advocates, 15th Floor, Mittal Towers "C", Nariman point,Mumbai-400021

Gentlemen,

Sub: Deficient documents in respect of applications for Refund claim reg.

Please refer your refund application dtd. 17.01.2025 on behalf of M/s. Obron Impex Pvt.Ltd. and others

Page 1 of 3

Mane

13-WP-3749-25.DOC

In this regard, it is to inform that refund claim is found to be incomplete due to non- submission of

a) Refund Application (Part A, B & C) in proper proforma with declaration. b) Original TR-6 challan copy w.r.t the payment made to customs

In view of the above, your refund application is returned herewith, in terms of Customs Refund application (Form) Regulation, 1995, for submission of above deficient documents, as mentioned in para 2 above. The refund application is disposed off accordingly.

Signed by Rajesh Pareek Date: 04-02-2025 15:11:28 Assistant Commissioner CRRS, CUSTOMS

It is evident from the contents of the impugned letter (supra) that the refund claim filed by the Petitioner has been found to be incomplete on account of nonsubmission of the refund application in the prescribed proforma, along with the requisite declaration and the original TR-6 Challan evidencing payment made to Customs.

The case of the Petitioner, however, is that the said documents are not available as they were washed away in floods. If that be so, it is unclear as to what can be adjudicated in the present proceedings.

In these circumstances, the present Petition is disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to support its refund application by placing on record any acceptable material, if available, and/or by providing a reasonable estimation, which may be considered in accordance with law, provided the Petitioner’s claim for refund otherwise subsists in law.

Page 2 of 3

Mane

13-WP-3749-25.DOC

With the aforesaid liberty to pursue appropriate proceedings, the Petition

stands disposed of, keeping all contentions open.

(AARTI SATHE, J.)

(G. S. KULKARNI, J.)

Page 3 of 3

Mane