https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118635 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejection of the refund claim by the Assistant Commissioner. It was determined that the original deposit made by the appellants was a pre-deposit and not a confirmed duty amount, rendering the limitation period for refund inapplicable. The Tribunal held that when a show cause notice proposes a lower duty amount, the authority cannot confirm a higher amount. Therefore, the excess deposit made by the appellants before the issuance of the notice was deemed refundable. The appeal was allowed, providing consequential relief as per the law. en-us Sun, 04 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Jul 2012 16:50:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118635 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejection of the refund claim by the Assistant Commissioner. It was determined that the original deposit made by the appellants was a pre-deposit and not a confirmed duty amount, rendering the limitation period for refund inapplicable. The Tribunal held that when a show cause notice proposes a lower duty amount, the authority cannot confirm a higher amount. Therefore, the excess deposit made by the appellants before the issuance of the notice was deemed refundable. The appeal was allowed, providing consequential relief as per the law. Case-Laws Customs Sun, 04 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118635