https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197061 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (A)'s decision to allow the refund claim, emphasizing that the disputed amount was an extra duty deposit, not subject to the time limit under the Customs Act. It differentiated between duty deposit and actual duty payable, citing relevant precedents. The Tribunal noted the early refund request by the respondent and distinguished the case from previous rulings cited by the revenue. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the revenue's appeal and upheld the refund claim, disposing of the respondent's Cross Objection in their favor. en-us Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 23 Dec 2017 12:53:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197061 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (A)'s decision to allow the refund claim, emphasizing that the disputed amount was an extra duty deposit, not subject to the time limit under the Customs Act. It differentiated between duty deposit and actual duty payable, citing relevant precedents. The Tribunal noted the early refund request by the respondent and distinguished the case from previous rulings cited by the revenue. Consequently, the Tribunal rejected the revenue's appeal and upheld the refund claim, disposing of the respondent's Cross Objection in their favor. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197061