TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Customs duty and coal cess refund rules clarified for pre-July 2006 assessments.</h1> The appeals were rejected, upholding the decision regarding the refund of excess customs duty and coal cess related to provisional assessments made before ... Refund claim - doctrine of unjust enrichment - provisional assessment - Held that: - The amendment to Section 18 of the Customs Act 1962 as regards doctrine of unjust enrichment will apply to the assessments finalised under Section 18 was incorporated on 13.07.2006. The applicability of these provisions of unjust enrichment for the consignments imported and put on provisional assessment prior to that date was because of litigation before various judicial forums - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. Issues:Refund of excess customs duty and coal cess due to inclusion of stevedoring and wharfage charges in provisional assessments made prior to July 2006.Analysis:The appeals were filed against orders-in-Appeal regarding the refund of excess customs duty and coal cess due to the inclusion of stevedoring and wharfage charges in provisional assessments made before July 2006. The respondent imported coking coal during 2000-2004, and after final assessment in 2007, the excess amount was credited to the consumer welfare fund. The 1st Appellate Authority held that unjust enrichment did not apply to imports before July 2006, citing the TVS Suzuki Ltd case. The Revenue argued that unjust enrichment should apply, referring to the Customs Act and relevant case law. The Commissioner(A.R.) emphasized the need for unjust enrichment, citing judgments from the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay and other cases.Upon review, it was found that the coking coal import was provisionally assessed from 2000-2004, before the amendment to Section 18 of the Customs Act in 2006. The issue of unjust enrichment was debated in various judicial forums, with conflicting judgments from different High Courts. The Larger Bench of the Tribunal in the Hindustan Zinc Ltd case clarified that refunds from provisional assessments before July 2006 should not require importer claims. This decision was based on considerations of previous judgments, including those of the Apex Court.The Larger Bench's ruling was supported by the judgments of the Apex Court in cases involving Standard Drum & Barrel Mfg Co. and Allied Photographics India Ltd. Given the settled issue by the Larger Bench and the legal interpretations provided, the impugned order was deemed correct and legally sound. Consequently, the appeals were rejected, upholding the decision regarding the refund of excess customs duty and coal cess related to provisional assessments made before July 2006.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
