Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Customs (Import) Versus Supreme Steel Industries

2015 (3) TMI 1079 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Denial of refund claim - Bar of limitation - imports are prior to 1.8.2008 - Held that:- Following the ruling of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Sony India Pvt. Ltd. (2014 (4) TMI 870 - DELHI HIGH COURT ) we hold that in the present case where the imports and duty are made prior to 1.8.2008, the amendment prescribed under Notification No. 93/2008 cannot be made applicable. The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. The respondent is held to be entitled to the refund. We further direct t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Order-in-Original rejecting the refund claim of the assessee on the ground of limitation, holding that the imports in the case of the assessee are prior to 1.8.2008. Notification No. 93/2008 dt. 1.8.2008 was issued prescribing the period of limitation as one year. Accordingly, the same will not be applicable and the refund claim to be allowed. 2. The brief facts are that the appellant imported goods vide Bills of Entry filed within the period September 2007 to July 2008 and the Customs Duty was .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on No. 93/2008. Being aggrieved, the appellant preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals), who vide the impugned order have held that the limitation will not apply in the case of the appellant as the imports are prior to 1.8.2008 and also paid Customs Duty prior to 1.8.2008. Accordingly, he set aside the Order-in-Original with consequential relief to the assessee. Being aggrieved the Revenue is in appeal before this Tribunal on the ground that the Commissioner (Appeals) have erred and al .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

sioner of Customs, New Delhi CUSAA 3/2014 & CM No.829/2014 wherein the question of law that arose for determination in the appeal "can period of limitation for preferring refund claims, specified in the amending notification No. 93/2008-Cus, be made applicable with retrospective effect, in absence of a limitation period in the original Notification No. 102/2007-Cus, in respect of goods imported prior to the issue of the amending notification. The Hon'ble High Court have observed tha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version