Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to refund of Terminal Excise Duty on supplies made under International Competitive Bidding, notwithstanding the authority's view that such supplies were exempt from duty and that refund was not admissible.
Analysis: The petition turned on the interpretation of para 8.3(c) of the Foreign Trade Policy and the connected procedural provisions. The policy treated supplies made against International Competitive Bidding as eligible for exemption from Terminal Excise Duty, and in other cases provided for refund. The Court relied on its earlier decisions and the consistent view that once a supply falls within the deemed export framework, the entitlement to refund of duty already paid cannot be denied merely because the supply was also capable of exemption at the time of clearance. The Court accepted that the petitioner had paid the duty and that the refund claim had to be processed under the prevailing policy.
Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to refund of Terminal Excise Duty, and the rejection of the refund claim could not be sustained.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded and the respondents were directed to process the refund claim in accordance with the 2009 policy.
Ratio Decidendi: Where the policy governing deemed exports recognizes refund of Terminal Excise Duty in the applicable category, refund cannot be denied merely because the supply was also treated as exempt at the point of clearance or because the authority views the claim as falling outside a procedural exclusion not borne out by the policy.