<?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>2025 (9) TMI 142 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777653</link>
    <description>An extra duty deposit made during a customs investigation or provisional assessment was treated as not having the character of duty for refund purposes. On that basis, the refund claim was held not to be barred by limitation and not defeated by unjust enrichment. The disputed amounts were therefore directed to be refunded, including the portion earlier rejected as time-barred and the portion credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund, because the deposit was not subject to the usual refund restrictions applicable to duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Sep 2025 08:19:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=847657" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 142 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777653</link>
      <description>An extra duty deposit made during a customs investigation or provisional assessment was treated as not having the character of duty for refund purposes. On that basis, the refund claim was held not to be barred by limitation and not defeated by unjust enrichment. The disputed amounts were therefore directed to be refunded, including the portion earlier rejected as time-barred and the portion credited to the Consumer Welfare Fund, because the deposit was not subject to the usual refund restrictions applicable to duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777653</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>