<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2016 (3) TMI 508 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325324</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the time limit under Section 27 of the Customs Act does not apply to anti-dumping duty refunds once duty imposition is final. The appellant&#039;s refund claim, filed within one year of the final corrigendum, was deemed valid under Section 9AA. The decision aligns with a Delhi High Court ruling, ensuring equitable treatment for duty refunds in similar cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2016 15:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=420384" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 508 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325324</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the time limit under Section 27 of the Customs Act does not apply to anti-dumping duty refunds once duty imposition is final. The appellant&#039;s refund claim, filed within one year of the final corrigendum, was deemed valid under Section 9AA. The decision aligns with a Delhi High Court ruling, ensuring equitable treatment for duty refunds in similar cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325324</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>