<?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>2018 (9) TMI 380 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366644</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the petitioner&#039;s claim for a refund of duty with interest was not time-barred under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, due to the second proviso exempting cases where duty was paid under protest from the one-year limitation period. The Court set aside the impugned order, allowing the refund claim to be computed and paid by a specified date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2018 12:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=533577" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 380 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366644</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the petitioner&#039;s claim for a refund of duty with interest was not time-barred under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962, due to the second proviso exempting cases where duty was paid under protest from the one-year limitation period. The Court set aside the impugned order, allowing the refund claim to be computed and paid by a specified date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366644</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>