1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Customs Act Appeal Success: Refund Claim Upheld After Limitation Misinterpretation</h1> The appeal was allowed by the Member (Judicial) as the rejection of the refund claim based on limitation under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, was ... Refund of SAD - time limitation - Section 27 of the CA, 1962 - Circular No. 06/2008-Cus. dated 28/04/2008 - Held that: - limitation has to be computed on or after 30/11/2010, being the month of November, when the goods were finally sold under the concerned Bill of Entry No. 93 dated 04/11/2009 - the Id. Commissioner (Appeals) have erred in rejecting the refund claim on the ground of limitation relying on the Circular No. 06/2008-Cus. dated 28/04/2008 under Section 27 of the CA, 1962 - refund allowed - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:- Whether the refund claim of SAD for Rs. 59,449/- was rightly rejected on the ground of limitation.Analysis:The appellant imported goods and later resold them during a specific period. A refund claim for SAD was filed, which was rejected by the Id. Commissioner (Appeals) citing limitation under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. The rejection was based on Circular No. 06/2008-Cus. dated 28/04/2008, which specified the eligibility criteria for refunds paid through DEPB Scrips. The appellant's appeal was also dismissed by the Id. Commissioner (Appeals) on the same grounds.The appellant contended that the limitation period should start from the date the right to claim benefit arises, as per the decision in Sony India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise. The appellant argued that since the goods were sold between September 2010 and November 2010, the claim made on 04/03/2011 was within the one-year limitation period. Therefore, the appellant requested the appeal to be allowed based on this interpretation.Upon reviewing the contentions, the Member (Judicial) found that the Id. Commissioner (Appeals) erred in rejecting the refund claim based on Circular No. 06/2008-Cus. The Member determined that the limitation period should commence after 30/11/2010, the month when the goods were sold under the relevant Bill of Entry. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. The Adjudicating Authority was directed to grant the refund of Rs. 59,449/- with interest within 60 days from the date of receipt of the order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
