2015 (3) TMI 1074

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....RTHY, J. For The Appellant : Mr. M. Balagopal, Advocate For The Respondent : Mr. Pakshi Rajan & Mr. N. Jagdish, AR Per: B.S.V. MURTHY In all these cases the issue involved is whether the appellants are eligible for refund of SAD claimed in respect of timber imported and sold by them in the domestic market. The reason for rejection of the claims is that the appellants failed to make a d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d to the benefit of exemption under Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. notwithstanding the fact that he made no endorsement that 'credit of duty is not admissible' on commercial invoices. Learned counsel submits that in this case also, no tax element was separately indicated and the facts and circumstances are similar to the one considered by the Tribunal Larger Bench. Therefore on this issue the appe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent of SAD to Customs Department. In the case of Indian Timbers, date of payment of duty was 13.05.2008 and date of filing the refund claim is 13.05.2009. According to General Clauses Act, for calculation of one year, the date on which duty was paid has to be omitted since it has to be calculated 'from the date of payment'. Once it is done, the calculation of one year period has to be made from 14....