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 was within the limitation period under Section 27 of the Customs Act, and whether the claim to the benefit of Notification No. 91/89 required examination on merits.
Analysis: The refund claim was found to have been filed within six months from the date of payment of duty. The earlier authorities had rejected the claim only on the ground that the assessment order at the port of importation had not been challenged, without examining whether the imported goods were entitled to the benefit of the notification. Since the merits of the notification claim had not been considered, the matter required fresh examination.
Conclusion: The refund claim was held to be within time, and the matter was remanded to the Assistant Collector to determine the availability of the notification benefit.