Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
HC dismissed the petition challenging the Settlement Commission's rejection of CENVAT credit claims for CVD paid on imported capital goods. Following Osram Surya, the court held that the limitation period introduced via amendment to Rule 4 of CENVAT Credit Rules applies to claims made after the amendment came into force, regardless of when imports occurred. The petitioner's failure to fulfill export obligations under EPCG scheme for four out of nine licenses, despite receiving an extended period of 8 years, and payment of duty only after DRI investigation commenced, further justified the rejection. The court emphasized the finality of settlement proceedings under Section 127(j) of the Customs Act.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.