https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204119 Where Light Dues are collected through Customs machinery under the Light House Act, 1927, the Customs officer assigned the relevant functions is the proper officer to process refund claims as well. The Act's refund mechanism permits recovery of excess payment if the claim is made within six months of each payment. Because the refund rejection arose from an order made by a Customs officer within that statutory framework, an appeal lay under Section 128(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The jurisdictional objection to the Commissioner (Appeals) therefore could not be sustained, and the dismissal of the appeal as not maintainable was unsustainable. en-us Fri, 17 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 22 Feb 2012 17:35:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204119 Where Light Dues are collected through Customs machinery under the Light House Act, 1927, the Customs officer assigned the relevant functions is the proper officer to process refund claims as well. The Act's refund mechanism permits recovery of excess payment if the claim is made within six months of each payment. Because the refund rejection arose from an order made by a Customs officer within that statutory framework, an appeal lay under Section 128(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The jurisdictional objection to the Commissioner (Appeals) therefore could not be sustained, and the dismissal of the appeal as not maintainable was unsustainable. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 17 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204119