<?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>1996 (6) TMI 95 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44559</link>
    <description>Customs duty and interest paid under protest pursuant to a detention notice were treated as outside the six-month limitation in the second proviso to Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. The refund authority was required to examine whether the claim satisfied Section 27(2) and to decide whether the amount was refundable or creditable to the statutory fund. On that basis, rejection of the refund application as time-barred was unsustainable, and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 11:34:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=83088" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (6) TMI 95 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44559</link>
      <description>Customs duty and interest paid under protest pursuant to a detention notice were treated as outside the six-month limitation in the second proviso to Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962. The refund authority was required to examine whether the claim satisfied Section 27(2) and to decide whether the amount was refundable or creditable to the statutory fund. On that basis, rejection of the refund application as time-barred was unsustainable, and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44559</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>