https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753745 CESTAT Allahabad allowed the appeal regarding refund of cash security deposit under Section 27 of Customs Act, 1962. The tribunal held that the lower authority erroneously applied time limitation under Section 27 when rejecting the refund claim. The deposited amount was security for provisional assessment, not duty payment. After Special Valuation Branch accepted the declared value, the security became refundable under Section 18(4), which mandates refund within three months of assessment finalization. The tribunal ruled Section 18(5) operates independently of Section 27 limitations, making the refund claim valid and enforceable. en-us Fri, 07 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Jun 2024 12:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753745 CESTAT Allahabad allowed the appeal regarding refund of cash security deposit under Section 27 of Customs Act, 1962. The tribunal held that the lower authority erroneously applied time limitation under Section 27 when rejecting the refund claim. The deposited amount was security for provisional assessment, not duty payment. After Special Valuation Branch accepted the declared value, the security became refundable under Section 18(4), which mandates refund within three months of assessment finalization. The tribunal ruled Section 18(5) operates independently of Section 27 limitations, making the refund claim valid and enforceable. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 07 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753745