Just a moment...

Top
Help
Upgrade to AI Search

We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:

1. Basic
Quick overview summary answering your query with referencesCategory-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI

2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
Detailed report covering:
     -   Overview Summary
     -   Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
     -   Relevant Case Laws
     -   Tariff / Classification / HSN
     -   Expert views from TaxTMI
     -   Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy

• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:

Explore AI Search

Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2019 (4) TMI 1359

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t (s) ORDER Per Shri P. K. Choudhary : This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Appeal No.Kol/Cus(A/P)/AA/1477/2017 dated 25.10.2017 passed by Commr. (Appeals) of Customs, Kolkata. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the respondent filed refund claim for Rs. 2,72,701/- in the prescribed format under Section 27(1)(a) & (b) of the Customs Act, 1962. SubsequentLY, am....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....anctioned the refund claim of Rs. 2,72,701/- instead of Rs. 3,56,753/-. Revenue filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals). The ld.Commissioner (Appeals) rejected the appeal filed by the Revenue. Being aggrieved, Revenue has preferred the present appeal. 3. Heard both sides and perused the appeal records. 4. I find that the respondent assessee was required to pay Rs. 2,72,701/-, which was p....