Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Refund of duty paid in excess - Admitted tax or not - The Tribunal found that the amounts paid by the appellant were not part of self-assessment and were not reflected in the ER-1 returns. Therefore, they were considered as deposits, and the limitation for refund did not apply. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's contention that the appellant should have challenged the self-assessment before seeking a refund, as the duty was not part of self-assessment. It was clarified that the freight amount was not included in the assessable value, as per previous decisions.
Refund of duty paid in excess - Admitted tax or not - The Tribunal found that the amounts paid by the appellant were not part of self-assessment and were not reflected in the ER-1 returns. Therefore, they were considered as deposits, and the limitation for refund did not apply. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's contention that the appellant should have challenged the self-assessment before seeking a refund, as the duty was not part of self-assessment. It was clarified that the freight amount was not included in the assessable value, as per previous decisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.