https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358382 The writ petition concerned declaration, extra duty deposit, and refund claims under the Board circular regime. Immediate substantive relief was declined because the declaration had already been rejected by the customs authority and that rejection had been affirmed in appeal. Interim protection against collection of extra duty deposit for future imports was maintained consistently with the circulars. The refund claim for amounts already deposited was left to the pending proceedings before the customs authority, since it could not be finally determined in writ jurisdiction at that stage. The authority was directed to decide the matter expeditiously after considering the documents and hearing the petitioner. en-us Tue, 27 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Apr 2018 08:01:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358382 The writ petition concerned declaration, extra duty deposit, and refund claims under the Board circular regime. Immediate substantive relief was declined because the declaration had already been rejected by the customs authority and that rejection had been affirmed in appeal. Interim protection against collection of extra duty deposit for future imports was maintained consistently with the circulars. The refund claim for amounts already deposited was left to the pending proceedings before the customs authority, since it could not be finally determined in writ jurisdiction at that stage. The authority was directed to decide the matter expeditiously after considering the documents and hearing the petitioner. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 27 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358382