<?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>2019 (4) TMI 492 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378048</link>
    <description>Refund of Special Additional Duty under Notification No. 102/2007-CUS, as amended by Notification No. 93/2008-CUS, is subject to the limitation period introduced by the amendment for imports made after that amendment. Where the refund claim is filed beyond one year from payment of duty, the stipulated condition in the notification governs the claim and it cannot be entertained contrary to that time limit. The earlier view relied on by the first appellate authority was distinguished because it concerned retrospective application of the limitation clause to pre-amendment imports. On that basis, the refund claim was not maintainable and the order allowing it was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2019 09:32:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=566032" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 492 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378048</link>
      <description>Refund of Special Additional Duty under Notification No. 102/2007-CUS, as amended by Notification No. 93/2008-CUS, is subject to the limitation period introduced by the amendment for imports made after that amendment. Where the refund claim is filed beyond one year from payment of duty, the stipulated condition in the notification governs the claim and it cannot be entertained contrary to that time limit. The earlier view relied on by the first appellate authority was distinguished because it concerned retrospective application of the limitation clause to pre-amendment imports. On that basis, the refund claim was not maintainable and the order allowing it was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 13 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>