Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        Note

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tribunal upholds refund of Special Additional Duty, rejecting Revenue's appeal on timing of claim</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi Versus S.R. Traders</h3> Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi Versus S.R. Traders - TMI Issues Involved:Applicability of the time period (limitation) to claim refund of Special Additional Duty (SAD) paid at the time of import of goods in terms of Notification No.102/2007-Cus as amended by Notification No.93/2008-Cus.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Facts and Law Applicable:The respondent imported goods under three Bills of Entry dated 20.06.15, 11.08.15, and 13.08.15, paying basic customs duty, additional duty, and SAD. The refund claim for SAD of Rs. 2,34,274/- was filed on 22.08.16. Notification No.102/2007-Customs exempts goods from SAD on subsequent sale, subject to conditions such as payment of all duties at the time of importation, issuance of invoices indicating no credit of SAD, filing a refund claim with the jurisdictional customs officer, and payment of appropriate sales tax or VAT.2. Amendment by Notification No.93/2008-Cus:Notification No.93/2008 introduced a time limit of one year from the date of payment of SAD for filing a refund claim. The Assistant Commissioner (Refund) rejected the claim on the ground that it was not filed within one year from the date of payment of duty under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962.3. Appeal and Tribunal's Consideration:The respondent's appeal was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals), referencing the Delhi High Court's decisions in M/s. Sony India Ltd. vs. CC, New Delhi and CC (Import) Vs. Gulati Sales Corporation. The Revenue appealed to the Tribunal, arguing that the time limit for SAD refund has been a contentious issue up to the Supreme Court, with conflicting judgments from different High Courts.4. Nature of SAD and Exemption Conditions:SAD, levied under Section 3(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, is a duty in the nature of sales tax/VAT, intended to counter-balance sales tax/VAT on like goods sold in India. The exemption under Notification No.102/2007 is conditional upon subsequent sales and payment of sales tax/VAT, with the refund claim to be filed within one year of payment of duty as per Notification No.93/2008.5. Conflicting High Court Judgments:The Delhi High Court in Sony India Ltd. held that the limitation period cannot start before the right to claim refund accrues, which is upon the sale of goods and payment of sales tax/VAT. Conversely, the Bombay High Court in CMS Infosystems Ltd. opined that the Customs Act's provisions, including the one-year limitation for refunds, apply to SAD.6. Tribunal's Analysis and Conclusion:The Tribunal noted that the Delhi High Court's findings were not disturbed by the Bombay High Court. The Delhi High Court's interpretation that the right to claim refund accrues upon the sale of goods and the limitation period cannot start before this event was upheld. The Tribunal concluded that the respondent is entitled to the refund as their right to claim refund accrued only when the sale took place, dismissing the Revenue's appeal and upholding the impugned order.Order Pronounced:The appeal of Revenue is dismissed, and the impugned order is upheld.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found