https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257227 An appellate direction granting consequential refund must be implemented by the Revenue, and a later request for payment is treated as a reminder to give effect to that order rather than a fresh refund claim. On that basis, the limitation objection based on failure to file a new refund application within six months was rejected, because the refund arose directly from the earlier appellate relief and related reassessment. The impugned order was set aside and the Customs Authority was directed to grant the refund with interest within the stipulated time. en-us Wed, 06 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Mar 2015 10:35:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257227 An appellate direction granting consequential refund must be implemented by the Revenue, and a later request for payment is treated as a reminder to give effect to that order rather than a fresh refund claim. On that basis, the limitation objection based on failure to file a new refund application within six months was rejected, because the refund arose directly from the earlier appellate relief and related reassessment. The impugned order was set aside and the Customs Authority was directed to grant the refund with interest within the stipulated time. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 06 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=257227