https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46821 The court dismissed the writ appeals, affirming the company's entitlement to a refund of customs duty paid on silica crucibles. It held that the company had not passed on the duty to customers, the limitation period did not apply, and the amended refund provisions applied retrospectively. The court found that the company's refund claims were timely and involved legal interpretation, justifying the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. The writ petition by SRF Limited was dismissed for lack of evidence that the duty was not passed on to customers. en-us Wed, 22 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 24 Jul 2010 11:17:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46821 The court dismissed the writ appeals, affirming the company's entitlement to a refund of customs duty paid on silica crucibles. It held that the company had not passed on the duty to customers, the limitation period did not apply, and the amended refund provisions applied retrospectively. The court found that the company's refund claims were timely and involved legal interpretation, justifying the exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. The writ petition by SRF Limited was dismissed for lack of evidence that the duty was not passed on to customers. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 22 Nov 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46821