https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126382 Refund claims for export cess were held to be governed by the six-month limitation period under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 because they were filed after that period and were not shown to have been made under protest. The argument that the limitation bar did not apply since the levy on prawns was unconstitutional was rejected, as there was no order declaring the levy unconstitutional. The earlier relied-upon ruling was treated as deciding only that exports of prawns or shrimps were not exigible to cess under the Agricultural Produce Cess Act, 1940. The rejection of the refund claims was therefore sustained. en-us Fri, 15 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 06 Nov 2012 10:39:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126382 Refund claims for export cess were held to be governed by the six-month limitation period under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 because they were filed after that period and were not shown to have been made under protest. The argument that the limitation bar did not apply since the levy on prawns was unconstitutional was rejected, as there was no order declaring the levy unconstitutional. The earlier relied-upon ruling was treated as deciding only that exports of prawns or shrimps were not exigible to cess under the Agricultural Produce Cess Act, 1940. The rejection of the refund claims was therefore sustained. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 15 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126382