Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (9) TMI 773 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (9) TMI 773 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Rejection of refund claim - SAD - ground of limitation - notification number 102/2007-CUS date 14.09.2007. The notification provides a period of one year for claiming the refund by treating the relevant date as date of payment of duty - provisional assessment - refund claim filed rejected on the ground that they should be filed after finalization of assessment - Held that: - Revenue cannot first refuse to accept the refund claim on the ground of provis .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

al verification - appeal disposed off. - C/431/2011-CU(DB) - FINAL ORDER NO. 53131/2016-CU(DB) - Dated:- 10-8-2016 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) and Shri V.Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Shri Vaibhav, Advocate for the Applicants Shri K. Poddar, DR for the Respondent ORDER After rejecting the request for adjournment we proceed to decide the appeal itself. Accordingly we have heard Ld. DR and have gone through the impugned orders. 2. It is seen that the appellants imported certain goods .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ith all the documentary evidence. It is seen from the impugned order of the Assistant Commissioner (Refund) that after verification of the documents and after satisfying himself about the fulfillment of the conditions he rejected the refund claim on the ground of limitation. The notification provides a period of one year for claiming the refund by treating the relevant date as date of payment of duty. 4. On appeal against the said order the appellant took a categorical stand that against the var .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

issions were accepted by the Commissioner (A) who set aside the order and there is no dispute about the said order of Commissioner (A). 6. It is seen that thereafter also the appellant continued to import the goods and the Bills of Entries were being assessed provisionally. However, as this refund claim in respect of the earlier Bill of Entry were not accepted by the Revenue on account of provisional nature of assessment, it seems that the appellant did not file any refund claim in respect of th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version