Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

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 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2002 (6) TMI 107

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... whether the refund claim filed by them is hit by time limit specified in Section 27 of the Customs Act. 2. I heard Shri Amit Bhagat, learned Advocate, on behalf of the Appellants and Shri S.C. Pushkarna, learned D.R., for the Revenue. The Dy. Commissioner has rejected refund claim filed by the Appellants on the ground that the duty of customs was paid on 2-11-98 whereas refund claim was filed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fects was resubmitted. It is not disputed by the Revenue that initial refund claim was filed by the Appellants on 16-4-99 in respect of Customs duty paid by them on 2-11-98 as such the Appellants have filed the refund claim within the period of 6 months from the date of payment as such the refund claim is not time barred. This was the view expressed by the Tribunal in the case of CCE, Bolpur v. Bh....