Limitation in customs appeals permits exclusion for bona fide refund proceedings, enabling restoration of Bill of Entry assessment challenges on merit...
Warehousing permission requires deposit at the designated bonded warehouse; unauthorised diversion triggers confiscation, redemption fine and importer...
The HC dismissed the appeal as time barred due to a 91-day delay in filing. The court held that the appellant/department, alleging lack of diligence by the respondent/assessee, must also adhere to the limitation period for filing appeals. The principle of equal diligence applies to both parties. The statute requires a fresh refund application following rectification of deficiencies. The court modified the Single Bench's direction, ordering the respondent to rectify all noted deficiencies and submit a fresh refund application within two weeks of receiving the order's certified copy. The appeal was therefore dismissed, and the matter was remanded for compliance with these conditions.
The HC dismissed the appeal as time barred due to a 91-day delay in filing. The court held that the appellant/department, alleging lack of diligence by the respondent/assessee, must also adhere to the limitation period for filing appeals. The principle of equal diligence applies to both parties. The statute requires a fresh refund application following rectification of deficiencies. The court modified the Single Bench's direction, ordering the respondent to rectify all noted deficiencies and submit a fresh refund application within two weeks of receiving the order's certified copy. The appeal was therefore dismissed, and the matter was remanded for compliance with these conditions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
