https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339901 A refund claim under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. had to be filed within one year from payment of additional customs duty, and the notification provided no power to condone delay. The CESTAT Chennai noted that time extensions granted for duty payment or return filing in Tamil Nadu did not apply to delayed refund claims. It held that neither the adjudicating authority nor the Tribunal could extend the prescribed period on equitable grounds where the scheme contained no condonation provision. The refund claim was therefore time-barred, the rejection was sustained, and the appeal failed. en-us Thu, 01 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Jan 2018 12:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339901 A refund claim under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. had to be filed within one year from payment of additional customs duty, and the notification provided no power to condone delay. The CESTAT Chennai noted that time extensions granted for duty payment or return filing in Tamil Nadu did not apply to delayed refund claims. It held that neither the adjudicating authority nor the Tribunal could extend the prescribed period on equitable grounds where the scheme contained no condonation provision. The refund claim was therefore time-barred, the rejection was sustained, and the appeal failed. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 01 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=339901