<?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>1929 (12) TMI 6 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288031</link>
    <description>Section 10 of the Indian Tariff Act, 1894 was construed on its own language, without importing English enactments referring to delivery or clearance. The provision was read as adjusting the parties&#039; rights even after the sale is complete: clause (a) allows the seller to recover any enhanced duty from the purchaser, and clause (b) correspondingly entitles the purchaser to the benefit of any reduction or remission of duty. The omission of the words &quot;delivery&quot; and &quot;clearance&quot; was treated as deliberate. On that construction, a purchaser who had paid the original price could recover the amount no longer payable, and the seller was bound to refund the duty benefit received from the Government.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Dec 1929 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 May 2020 15:42:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=612927" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1929 (12) TMI 6 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288031</link>
      <description>Section 10 of the Indian Tariff Act, 1894 was construed on its own language, without importing English enactments referring to delivery or clearance. The provision was read as adjusting the parties&#039; rights even after the sale is complete: clause (a) allows the seller to recover any enhanced duty from the purchaser, and clause (b) correspondingly entitles the purchaser to the benefit of any reduction or remission of duty. The omission of the words &quot;delivery&quot; and &quot;clearance&quot; was treated as deliberate. On that construction, a purchaser who had paid the original price could recover the amount no longer payable, and the seller was bound to refund the duty benefit received from the Government.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Dec 1929 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288031</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>