TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Customs Authorities could refuse to comply with the Tribunal's refund order merely because a reference application had been filed, and whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing compliance.
Analysis: The merits of the refund dispute had already been decided by the Tribunal, and that decision was binding on the Customs Officers. The filing of a reference application under Section 130(3) of the Customs Act, 1962 did not operate as a stay of the Tribunal's order. The Court declined to reopen the merits and confined itself to enforcing obedience to the Tribunal's direction.
Conclusion: The Customs Authorities were bound to comply with the Tribunal's order, and the writ petition was allowed with a direction to make payment in terms of that order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
