<?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>2026 (8) TMI 115 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796242</link>
    <description>Refund claims under the Special Additional Duty exemption scheme arise upon subsequent sale of imported goods and fulfilment of the prescribed conditions. The notes state that Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 does not apply its limitation mechanism to Special Additional Duty. They further state that Notification No. 93/2008-Cus could not validly impose a one-year limitation running from duty payment because it curtailed a substantive refund right without statutory authority. The Tribunal&#039;s approach, consistent with the Larger Bench view and Delhi High Court decisions, treated that limitation as inapplicable and upheld the refund claims.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Aug 2026 08:20:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=914950" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (8) TMI 115 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796242</link>
      <description>Refund claims under the Special Additional Duty exemption scheme arise upon subsequent sale of imported goods and fulfilment of the prescribed conditions. The notes state that Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 does not apply its limitation mechanism to Special Additional Duty. They further state that Notification No. 93/2008-Cus could not validly impose a one-year limitation running from duty payment because it curtailed a substantive refund right without statutory authority. The Tribunal&#039;s approach, consistent with the Larger Bench view and Delhi High Court decisions, treated that limitation as inapplicable and upheld the refund claims.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796242</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>