Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

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
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Court Invalidates Statutory Interest on Customs Charges</h1> <h3>Diamond and Gem Development Corporation Versus Union of India</h3> The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, finding that the levy of statutory interest on delayed payment of cost recovery charges for customs staff was ... - Issues Involved:1. Levy of statutory interest on delayed payment of cost recovery charges for customs staff.2. Jurisdiction and authority to levy interest under the Customs Act, 1962.3. Applicability of Section 28AA and Section 142 of the Customs Act, 1962.4. Estoppel and equitable principles in levying interest.5. Administrative versus adjudicatory proceedings in the context of cost recovery charges.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Levy of Statutory Interest on Delayed Payment of Cost Recovery Charges for Customs Staff:The petitioner challenged the imposition of statutory interest on purported arrears of cost recovery charges for customs staff, as ordered by the Commissioner of Customs, Gujarat. The petitioner argued that there was no statutory provision under the Customs Act, 1962, authorizing the levy of interest on delayed payment of such charges. The court examined the notifications and guidelines governing the appointment of the petitioner as Custodian and found no provision for the levy of interest. Consequently, the court concluded that the demand for interest was without legal backing and thus invalid.2. Jurisdiction and Authority to Levy Interest under the Customs Act, 1962:The petitioner contended that the levy of interest lacked jurisdiction and authority under the Customs Act. The court noted that Section 28AA of the Act provides for interest on delayed payment of duty, but reimbursement of customs staff costs does not equate to the levy of duty. The court also referenced the Madras High Court ruling in TAN India Limited vs. Collector of Central Excise, which held that interest cannot be levied in the absence of a statutory provision. The court determined that the respondent had no jurisdiction to levy interest on cost recovery charges.3. Applicability of Section 28AA and Section 142 of the Customs Act, 1962:The court analyzed the applicability of Sections 28AA and 142 of the Act. Section 28AA pertains to interest on delayed payment of duty, which was not applicable to the cost recovery charges. Section 142, which deals with the recovery of sums due to the government, could not be invoked for non-statutory dues like cost recovery charges. The court held that the respondent could not use Section 142 to recover interest on such charges.4. Estoppel and Equitable Principles in Levying Interest:The respondents argued that the petitioner was estopped from challenging the interest levy since it had requested installment payments. The court rejected this argument, stating that the petitioner's request for installments did not imply consent to pay interest. Furthermore, the court emphasized that interest could not be levied on equitable grounds without statutory authority. The respondents would need to seek recovery through legal proceedings if they wished to claim interest on equitable grounds.5. Administrative versus Adjudicatory Proceedings in the Context of Cost Recovery Charges:The court identified a mix-up between adjudicatory and administrative proceedings in the respondent's actions. The show-cause notices issued to the petitioner included both quasi-judicial and administrative elements. The court clarified that while the respondent could initiate adjudicatory proceedings under Section 45(1) for non-compliance with cost recovery charges, the recovery of such charges was an administrative matter. The court found that the respondent had improperly combined these proceedings, leading to an invalid order.Conclusion:The court concluded that the levy of statutory interest on delayed payment of cost recovery charges was without legal authority. It quashed the impugned orders to the extent they levied interest at statutory rates. The petition was allowed, and the rule was made absolute with no order as to costs.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found