<?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 (12) TMI 1487 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372718</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the refund claim of additional duty of Customs under Notification No. 102/2007 must be filed within one year, in accordance with Notification No. 93/2008 and Section 27 of the Customs Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) was found to have erred in favoring the assessee by interpreting the limitation period expansively. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) Order, allowed the Department&#039;s Appeal, and rejected the refund claim.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 May 2021 10:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=549709" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 1487 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372718</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the refund claim of additional duty of Customs under Notification No. 102/2007 must be filed within one year, in accordance with Notification No. 93/2008 and Section 27 of the Customs Act. The Commissioner (Appeals) was found to have erred in favoring the assessee by interpreting the limitation period expansively. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) Order, allowed the Department&#039;s Appeal, and rejected the refund claim.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372718</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>