The High Court declined to continue contempt proceedings arising from post-judgment collection of anti-dumping duty. It accepted the respondents' explanation that the continued levy resulted from an inadvertent misinterpretation of the earlier order, not wilful or deliberate disobedience, and noted that collection had been stopped. The Court further recorded that refund of the amounts collected had been decided upon, the petitioner had applied for refund, and the refund applications would be processed immediately. In these circumstances, it held that no useful purpose would be served by retaining the contempt application and disposed of the matter.
The High Court declined to continue contempt proceedings arising from post-judgment collection of anti-dumping duty. It accepted the respondents' explanation that the continued levy resulted from an inadvertent misinterpretation of the earlier order, not wilful or deliberate disobedience, and noted that collection had been stopped. The Court further recorded that refund of the amounts collected had been decided upon, the petitioner had applied for refund, and the refund applications would be processed immediately. In these circumstances, it held that no useful purpose would be served by retaining the contempt application and disposed of the matter.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
