https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43024 The court dismissed the petitioners' claim regarding the inclusion of post-import expenses in customs duty calculation but ruled in favor of the company for the refund of countervailing duty wrongly levied on imported goods. The court rejected the argument that a circular by the Central Board of Excise and Customs could alter established legal interpretations, emphasizing the circular's inability to override judicial decisions. The court directed the respondents to refund the countervailing duty within four weeks and allowed enforcement of the bank guarantee for any outstanding duty. No cost orders were issued. en-us Mon, 29 Jul 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 15 Jun 2010 16:51:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43024 The court dismissed the petitioners' claim regarding the inclusion of post-import expenses in customs duty calculation but ruled in favor of the company for the refund of countervailing duty wrongly levied on imported goods. The court rejected the argument that a circular by the Central Board of Excise and Customs could alter established legal interpretations, emphasizing the circular's inability to override judicial decisions. The court directed the respondents to refund the countervailing duty within four weeks and allowed enforcement of the bank guarantee for any outstanding duty. No cost orders were issued. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 29 Jul 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43024