<?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>2017 (1) TMI 7 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336927</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found in favor of the respondent in a customs case involving the timeliness of filing an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the eligibility for a refund of excess duty paid. The Tribunal determined that the appeal was not time-barred, as the cause of action arose within the stipulated time. It upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to grant a refund of excess duty paid by the respondent, emphasizing that the duty incidence was borne by the respondent, making them eligible for a refund under Section 27 of the Customs Act. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the respondent&#039;s entitlement to the refund.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2018 12:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453679" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (1) TMI 7 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336927</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found in favor of the respondent in a customs case involving the timeliness of filing an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) and the eligibility for a refund of excess duty paid. The Tribunal determined that the appeal was not time-barred, as the cause of action arose within the stipulated time. It upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to grant a refund of excess duty paid by the respondent, emphasizing that the duty incidence was borne by the respondent, making them eligible for a refund under Section 27 of the Customs Act. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue&#039;s appeal, affirming the respondent&#039;s entitlement to the refund.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336927</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>