https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208614 The show-cause notice dated 17-3-2005 was deemed legal and proper, not barred by any limitation clause. The initially condoned delay in filing the drawback claim was found to be beyond the authorized limit, rendering the granted drawback erroneous. The applicant's request for condonation under Rule 7A was considered invalid as proper application and orders for condonation were lacking. Consequently, the Revision Application was rejected, and the impugned order-in-appeal was upheld, emphasizing adherence to statutory time limits as per the Supreme Court precedent in Union of India v. Kirloskar Pneumatic Company. en-us Mon, 24 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 21 Jan 2012 16:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208614 The show-cause notice dated 17-3-2005 was deemed legal and proper, not barred by any limitation clause. The initially condoned delay in filing the drawback claim was found to be beyond the authorized limit, rendering the granted drawback erroneous. The applicant's request for condonation under Rule 7A was considered invalid as proper application and orders for condonation were lacking. Consequently, the Revision Application was rejected, and the impugned order-in-appeal was upheld, emphasizing adherence to statutory time limits as per the Supreme Court precedent in Union of India v. Kirloskar Pneumatic Company. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 24 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208614