Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3221 to 3240 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Refund of special additional duty was not subject to the one-year limitation inserted by Notification No. 93/2008-Cus. because Section 27 of the Customs Act did not cover such duty paid on import. The article notes that imposing a limitation period from the date of duty payment through an amended exemption notification would affect the substantive refund right without statutory amendment. Following the Larger Bench ruling in Ambey Sales, the High Court found the Tribunal justified in allowing the refund claims and held that no substantial question of law arose. The revenue appeals were dismissed.
Refund of special additional duty was not subject to the one-year limitation inserted by Notification No. 93/2008-Cus. because Section 27 of the Customs Act did not cover such duty paid on import. The article notes that imposing a limitation period from the date of duty payment through an amended exemption notification would affect the substantive refund right without statutory amendment. Following the Larger Bench ruling in Ambey Sales, the High Court found the Tribunal justified in allowing the refund claims and held that no substantial question of law arose. The revenue appeals were dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
