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
  • 2026
  • 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
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    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 modifies pre-deposit order for Anti-Dumping Duty, directs payment allocation</h1> The Court modified the Tribunal's order on pre-deposit regarding Anti-Dumping Duty (ADD) by considering the excess payment made by the appellant. The ... Waiver of pre deposit - Evasion of custom duty - question on quantum of deposit amount ordered by the tribunal - Suppression of value of goods - Held that:- It is seen from the orders of the Adjudicating Authority as well as the order of the Tribunal, that on demand, the appellant has paid a sum of ₹ 73,34,856/- towards Anti-Dumping Duty and a sum of ₹ 35,31,843/- was appropriated towards customs duty. It is to be noted that vide final notification No.121/2006-Cus. dated 26.12.2006, the anti-dumping duty was reduced to ₹ 60.00 lakhs. Hence there is an excess payment towards anti-dumping duty. - if anti-dumping duty is reduced and the amount so paid is in excess of the demand, the said amount shall be refunded. Tribunal, without taking note of the excess payment made, had ordered pre-deposit of ₹ 60.00 lakhs, which is not in consonance with the above-said provision. - taking note of the deposit made towards anti-dumping duty at ₹ 73,34,856/- in excess of the final notification dated 26.12.2006 at ₹ 60.00 lakhs, we are inclined to accept the plea of the appellant. However, taking note of the demand of customs duty, at this point of time, the amount shall not be refunded. - Partial stay granted. Issues:1. Whether the Tribunal's decision on pre-deposit of Anti-Dumping Duty (ADD) was correctRs.2. Whether the Tribunal erred in directing the appellant to deposit a specific amount towards the total ADD demand when a portion had already been paidRs.3. Should the excess payment made by the appellant towards ADD be considered for refund as per the Customs Tariff ActRs.4. Was the appellant justified in their claim regarding the excess payment and the Tribunal's order for pre-depositRs.5. How should the Tribunal's order on pre-deposit be modified based on the excess payment made by the appellantRs.Analysis:1. The appellant was involved in importing silk fabrics with alleged under-valuation and over-valuation, leading to a demand for customs duty and provisional ADD. The Tribunal ordered pre-deposit of &8377; 60 lakhs despite the appellant having paid &8377; 73,34,856 towards ADD, raising questions on the necessity of the pre-deposit given the excess payment already made.2. The Customs Tariff Act allows for a refund of excess ADD collected when the final duty amount is reduced. The appellant argued that the Tribunal failed to consider the excess payment of ADD and ordered pre-deposit unjustly. The Court noted the provision for refund and the appellant's payment exceeding the final ADD amount of &8377; 60 lakhs.3. Considering the excess payment made by the appellant towards ADD, the Court found merit in the appellant's claim and modified the Tribunal's order. The Court directed that &8377; 60 lakhs from the payment of &8377; 73,34,856 should be appropriated towards ADD, with the balance for customs duty. Additionally, the appellant was directed to deposit a further &8377; 25 lakhs towards the duty liability to comply with the modified pre-deposit order.4. The Court acknowledged the appellant's argument regarding suffering prejudice during adjudication due to seized records not being returned. While refraining from commenting on this issue, the Court suggested that the Department should consider returning the seized records upon a formal request from the appellant.5. In conclusion, the Court modified the Tribunal's pre-deposit order, emphasizing the excess payment made by the appellant towards ADD. The appellant was directed to make additional deposits as per the modified order, and the pre-deposit of the remaining amount demanded was waived pending the appeal before the Tribunal.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found