CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
CESTAT held that the appellant, an importer from Malaysia, cleared goods on payment of merit rate of duty as Certificates of Origin (COO) were not available at the time of filing the Bills of Entry. Upon subsequent receipt of COOs, the appellant sought refund invoking preferential duty, but the Refund-Sanctioning Officer's prolonged inaction rendered that remedy ineffective. Tribunal applied Section 14 of the Limitation Act, holding that time spent bona fide and diligently before an ineffectual forum is to be excluded while computing limitation. The impugned orders were set aside and the matters remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for de novo adjudication by a reasoned, speaking order after hearing the appellant.
CESTAT held that the appellant, an importer from Malaysia, cleared goods on payment of merit rate of duty as Certificates of Origin (COO) were not available at the time of filing the Bills of Entry. Upon subsequent receipt of COOs, the appellant sought refund invoking preferential duty, but the Refund-Sanctioning Officer's prolonged inaction rendered that remedy ineffective. Tribunal applied Section 14 of the Limitation Act, holding that time spent bona fide and diligently before an ineffectual forum is to be excluded while computing limitation. The impugned orders were set aside and the matters remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for de novo adjudication by a reasoned, speaking order after hearing the appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
