Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
The CESTAT held that the corrigendum issued for a demand related to shipments dated 10.05.2008 constituted part of the original show cause notice, as adjudication commenced only after its issuance and the appellant's response. However, since the corrigendum was issued beyond the one-year limitation period prescribed under Section 28 of the Customs Act, the demand was time-barred. The Tribunal distinguished this case from instances where an incorrect provision is cited but the claim remains valid, emphasizing that the limitation under Section 28 is strictly one year from the relevant date. Consequently, the Order-in-Original confirming the duty demand with interest on five shipping bills was set aside and the appeal allowed.