https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268080 Refund claims for Special Additional Duty of Customs under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus must comply with the prescribed one-year limitation, and refund notifications are construed strictly. Although the claim was first lodged within time, the record did not show that its withdrawal was at the instance of Customs officers, and the resubmission occurred after expiry of the limitation period. The claim was therefore time-barred under the customs limitation framework reflected in Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, read with the principle in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The remand order could not be sustained, and rejection of the refund was restored. en-us Fri, 23 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Nov 2015 07:29:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268080 Refund claims for Special Additional Duty of Customs under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus must comply with the prescribed one-year limitation, and refund notifications are construed strictly. Although the claim was first lodged within time, the record did not show that its withdrawal was at the instance of Customs officers, and the resubmission occurred after expiry of the limitation period. The claim was therefore time-barred under the customs limitation framework reflected in Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, read with the principle in Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The remand order could not be sustained, and rejection of the refund was restored. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 23 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268080