Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the refund claim arising from concessional duty on taxi cars under the notification was barred by limitation under Section 11B, or whether the assessee's correspondence and the subsequent condonation of delay constituted a timely claim for refund.
Analysis: The concessional rate under the notification was available only when the car was registered for use as a taxi and the registration documents were produced within the stipulated period or within the extended period allowed on condonation of delay. The assessee had exchanged correspondence with the Department, intimated that differential duty would be debited if the documents were not received in time, and specifically stated that refund claims would be filed and credit granted. The Tribunal treated this communication as a claim for refund in substance, following the principle that a refund claim need not be in a rigid form if the assessee has clearly staked the claim and contested the duty payment. Since the formal claim followed shortly after condonation of delay and the notification itself contemplated extension of time, the claim was held to be a continuation of the original claim and not a fresh, time-barred claim.
Conclusion: The refund claim was not barred by limitation and was held maintainable in favour of the assessee.