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.
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: ?
Even if Sort by Date is selected, exact match will be shown on the top.
RelevanceDate
    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
      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 rules in favor of petitioner M/s. Madura Coats Limited in cotton thread export drawback case</h1> <h3>MADURA COATS LTD. Versus GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND OTHERS</h3> MADURA COATS LTD. Versus GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND OTHERS - 1986 (23) E.L.T. 63 (Mad.) Issues Involved:1. Entitlement to drawback on exported cotton sewing thread.2. Compliance with procedural requirements for claiming drawback.3. Validity and enforceability of the notification dated 8th April, 1975.4. Timeliness of the claim for drawback.5. Application of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1971.Detailed Analysis:1. Entitlement to Drawback on Exported Cotton Sewing Thread:The petitioner, M/s. Madura Coats Limited, exported cotton sewing thread between 28th June, 1973, and 26th March, 1974, and claimed a drawback as per a notification issued by the Government of India on 8th April, 1975, which fixed the rate at Rs. 2.34 per kg for exports made between 1st March, 1973, and 31st December, 1973. The court recognized that the notification had statutory sanction under Sections 75(1) and (2) of the Customs Act, 1962, thereby granting the petitioner a statutory right to claim the drawback.2. Compliance with Procedural Requirements for Claiming Drawback:The respondents argued that the petitioner did not comply with the procedural requirements, such as stating the claim for drawback at the time of export in the shipping bill and making a declaration regarding the duties paid. However, the court noted that the petitioner had made repeated representations and that the notification dated 8th April, 1975, was issued based on these representations. The court held that the procedural requirements should not disentitle the petitioner from claiming the drawback, especially since the notification had a statutory value.3. Validity and Enforceability of the Notification Dated 8th April, 1975:The respondents contended that the notification was not published in the official gazette and thus could not be enforced. The court rejected this argument, stating that the notification was within the powers conferred upon the Central Government by the Customs Act and the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1971. The court emphasized that the letter dated 8th April, 1975, gave the petitioner a statutory right to claim the drawback and did not require further notification in the official gazette.4. Timeliness of the Claim for Drawback:The respondents argued that the claims made by the petitioner were belated. The court, however, found that the petitioner had made the claim as soon as the notification was issued and had followed up with reminders. The court held that the delay in processing the claim by the Customs Department should not prejudice the petitioner's right to the drawback.5. Application of the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1971:The court examined the relevant provisions of the Customs Act and the Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 1971. It noted that item 27 of Schedule II of the Rules included 'Made-up articles, garments, chiefly made from textile materials,' which covered the cotton sewing thread exported by the petitioner. The court concluded that the petitioner's claim for drawback was valid under the Rules and that the letter dated 8th April, 1975, provided the necessary statutory basis for the claim.Conclusion:The court directed the respondents to pay the drawback dues to the petitioner as per the notification dated 8th April, 1975, after verifying the correctness of the amounts claimed. The rule nisi was made absolute in all the writ petitions except W.P. Nos. 2446 and 3070 of 1978, which were dismissed as superfluous. The court emphasized that the petitioner was entitled to the drawback as per the statutory provisions and the notification issued by the Government of India.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found