Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
- βοΈ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- π Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws β


Just a moment...
Introducing the βIn Favour Ofβ filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws β


Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
The HC dismissed the revenue's appeal challenging a tribunal order regarding time limitation for refund claims under customs law. The court upheld the tribunal's decision that the one-year limitation period under Section 27(1B)(c) commences from the date of final assessment rather than from the date of provisional duty payment. The HC agreed with precedent establishing that where assessment is provisional, the refund application timeline must be calculated from finalization of assessment, not initial duty payment. The court found no substantial question of law arose from the tribunal's order, which correctly applied statutory provisions over contrary interpretations of Notification No. 93/2008. The appeal was dismissed as devoid of merit, affirming the taxpayer's position on refund claim timing requirements.