<?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>2024 (9) TMI 949 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758705</link>
    <description>Debit of a DEPB scrip was treated as equivalent to cash payment for purposes of the customs exemption and MODVAT credit scheme, so the Revenue&#039;s objection could not defeat refund of the later cash remittance. The refund claim was also within the six-month limitation period under Section 27 of the Customs Act because the cash payment was made on 19.07.1999 and the claim was filed on 27.08.1999. On that basis, the refund was held admissible and not time-barred.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Sep 2024 07:53:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=768710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 949 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758705</link>
      <description>Debit of a DEPB scrip was treated as equivalent to cash payment for purposes of the customs exemption and MODVAT credit scheme, so the Revenue&#039;s objection could not defeat refund of the later cash remittance. The refund claim was also within the six-month limitation period under Section 27 of the Customs Act because the cash payment was made on 19.07.1999 and the claim was filed on 27.08.1999. On that basis, the refund was held admissible and not time-barred.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758705</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>