Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Don't have an account? Register Here
<h1>Dismissal of Writ Petition for Duty Refund, Emphasizing Proper Legal Channels</h1> <h3>EASTERN SILK INDUSTRIES LTD. Versus ASSISTANT COMMR. OF CUS., BANGALORE</h3> The court dismissed the writ petition seeking quashing of a subsequent notice and refund of a duty amount, emphasizing that the petitioner could seek ... - Issues:1. Dispute over wastage generated during manufacturing process2. Show cause notice for demanding duty amount3. Coercive recovery of duty amount before adjudication of show cause notices4. Petitioner seeking quashing of subsequent notice and refund of amount5. Request for writ of mandamus to adjudicate show cause noticeAnalysis:1. The petitioner, an export-oriented unit, faced a dispute regarding the claim towards wastage generated during manufacturing, which required showing corresponding export value. The petitioner claimed benefits under Notification No. 52/2003.2. The Deputy Commissioner of Customs issued a show cause notice demanding duty amount for excess wastage availed, leading to a subsequent notice with revised duty amount. The petitioner responded to both notices, but they were not adjudicated.3. The petitioner alleged coercive recovery of Rs. 14.35 lakhs without proper adjudication. The petitioner sought quashing of the subsequent notice, arguing it was against customs duty norms for export units and used to coerce payment.4. The petitioner's counsel argued for refund of the recovered amount and quashing of unadjudicated notices. The court noted that the payment, whether under coercion or not, could be subject to refund through proper legal channels, not via a writ of mandamus.5. The court dismissed the writ petition, stating that while the petitioner could seek refund through legal means, issuing a writ of mandamus for an unascertained amount was not appropriate. The petitioner was advised to pursue the matter before the relevant authority for adjudication of the show cause notices.