1982 (12) TMI 187

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n filed against the order No. S/49. 55/80CS dated 9-5-1980 passed by the Appellate Collr., Bombay, rejecting the refund claim of the appellant on the ground of limitation alone vide Section 27 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellants contention is that rejection of their claim is not correct on the ground that Section 27, as amended with effect from 1978 had extended the time for filing of ref .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . H.A.L. were owned by the Govt. of India, in strict law, they were a corporate body conducting their business on a commercial basis. It was further submitted that while the work of clearance through the Customs had been handled by the Embarkation Hdqrs., the importers were M/s. H.A.L., who were not entitled in law to the time limit of one year for filing of refund claims. 4. We are of the cons .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X