<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (11) TMI 318 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76864</link>
    <description>Countervailing duty collected under a circular later quashed had to be refunded because the refund obligation became unconditional once the circular was invalidated. The assessee had paid under provisional assessment and had not passed the duty burden to any third party, so unjust enrichment did not bar restitution. Interest was payable from the date the refund right crystallised, namely the date of quashing of the circular, and the provisional duty bond was liable to be released.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=115049" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (11) TMI 318 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76864</link>
      <description>Countervailing duty collected under a circular later quashed had to be refunded because the refund obligation became unconditional once the circular was invalidated. The assessee had paid under provisional assessment and had not passed the duty burden to any third party, so unjust enrichment did not bar restitution. Interest was payable from the date the refund right crystallised, namely the date of quashing of the circular, and the provisional duty bond was liable to be released.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76864</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>