https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94863 The Tribunal held that the review application by the Collector of Customs under Section 129D was not maintainable for recovering erroneous refunds, emphasizing the need to follow the procedure under Section 28. Multiple judgments favored the appellants, highlighting the necessity of adhering to the prescribed refund recovery process. The Tribunal confirmed the timeliness of the refund application and dismissed allegations of forgery, stressing the requirement for a proper investigation and show-cause notice under Section 28 for such claims. The impugned order was set aside, the appeal was allowed, and the Tribunal rejected the plea to stay proceedings pending a criminal case, asserting the independence of criminal proceedings from those under the Customs Act. en-us Tue, 09 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Dec 2011 13:53:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94863 The Tribunal held that the review application by the Collector of Customs under Section 129D was not maintainable for recovering erroneous refunds, emphasizing the need to follow the procedure under Section 28. Multiple judgments favored the appellants, highlighting the necessity of adhering to the prescribed refund recovery process. The Tribunal confirmed the timeliness of the refund application and dismissed allegations of forgery, stressing the requirement for a proper investigation and show-cause notice under Section 28 for such claims. The impugned order was set aside, the appeal was allowed, and the Tribunal rejected the plea to stay proceedings pending a criminal case, asserting the independence of criminal proceedings from those under the Customs Act. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 09 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94863