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.
CESTAT dismissed the Department's appeal challenging entitlement to interest under Section 27A of the Customs Act in respect of refund of additional customs duty under Section 3(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, holding the appeal untenable. The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's request to keep the matter in abeyance pending a higher forum's appeal, explaining that pending proceedings in a superior court do not automatically preclude adjudication in the appellate forum absent a stay. Applying and respectfully following the ratio of the Madras HC decision in the respondent's own case, and noting no stay had been shown, the Tribunal held the respondent entitled to interest from three months after filing the refund claim and set aside the departmental appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.