https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368702 The appeal was successful as the Member (Judicial) found that the refund claim for additional custom duty paid by importers of specific yarn was not time-barred under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The rejection of the refund claim by the Assistant Commissioner was overturned as it was deemed to be within the one-year limitation period from the date of subsequent sale, in line with relevant notifications and a High Court decision. The Member emphasized that a limitation period imposed through notification cannot prevail over substantive rights, leading to the appeal being allowed in favor of the appellants. en-us Wed, 12 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Oct 2018 09:54:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368702 The appeal was successful as the Member (Judicial) found that the refund claim for additional custom duty paid by importers of specific yarn was not time-barred under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The rejection of the refund claim by the Assistant Commissioner was overturned as it was deemed to be within the one-year limitation period from the date of subsequent sale, in line with relevant notifications and a High Court decision. The Member emphasized that a limitation period imposed through notification cannot prevail over substantive rights, leading to the appeal being allowed in favor of the appellants. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 12 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368702