Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. DCW Ltd. & Anr. Versus Union of India & Ors.

2015 (11) TMI 35 - SUPREME COURT

Denial of refund claim - Unjust enrichment - recovery of duty by encashment of the Bank Guarantee - earlier stay order was vacated due to failure comply with stay order - Held that:- It is only ₹ 17.50 lakhs which was deposited by the appellant pursuant to the interim orders of the Court. The Court had directed the appellant to deposit ₹ 70 lakhs. As far as the balance amount is concerned that could not be deposited. It resulted in vacation of the stay order. Thus, once the stay orde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

which was clearly applicable - Decided against assessee. - Civil Appeal No. 987/2007 - Dated:- 23-9-2015 - Mr. A.K. Sikri And Mr. Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ For the Petitioner : Mr. S. Vasudevan, Adv., Mr. V. Lakshmikumaran, Adv., Mr. M. P. Devanath, Adv., Ms. L. Charanaya, Adv., Ms. Nupur Maheshwari, Adv., Mr. Hemant Bajaj, Adv., Mr. R. Ramachandran, Adv. And Mr. Aditya Bhattacharya, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. K. Radhakrishnan, Sr. Adv., Mr. Rupesh Kumar, Adv., Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv., Ms. Alka .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he appellant approached the High Court of Gujarat by way of writ petition with the prayer that the appellant be allowed to get the said machinery released on payment of admitted amount of duty. On this writ petition, interim orders dated 04.05.1992 were passed permitting the appellant to deposit a sum of ₹ 70 lakhs as a condition for utilizing the machinery. We may record here that the appellant had earlier furnished the Bank Guarantee in the sum of ₹ 1,45,27,079/-. The exact order w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

77; 70,00,000/- from 1st August, 1992, in four equal monthly installments. The bank guarantee, which the applicant is required to continue, will have to be reduced to the extent installments are paid by the applicant. The respondents will be at liberty to withdraw the amount that may be deposited by the applicant in this Court on condition that whenever called upon to do so; they will repay that amount within the time that may be specified by this Court. As per the aforesaid order, the appellant .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

antee. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under:- In the result it is clarified and directed that the interim relief granted earlier has stood vacated pursuant to the order passed by this Court on September 18, 1992 inasmuch as the Company has not deposited the amount of ₹ 70 lakhs as agreed and directed. It is further directed that the Union of India, Collector of Customs, Ahmedabad, and Assistant Collector of Customs, Kandla Port, Kutch, will be at liberty to encash the bank .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o dismissed by this Court on 10.09.1993, inter alia, observing that it was not a case for interference with the order of the High Court as the appellant had defaulted in the matter of payment of installments. The Bank Guarantee was, however, encashed to cover the amount up to ₹ 70 lakhs, as for encashment of the Bank Guarantee for the remaining amount, the Tribunal had granted stay which course of action was permitted by this Court as well dismissing the special leave petition of the appel .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

authorities that the burden was not passed on the ultimate consumers, the appellant was not entitled to refund. Against the order, the appellant approached the High Court. The High Court has, by the impugned judgment dated 15.12.2005, allowed the refund to the extent of ₹ 17.50 lakhs and rejected the prayer for the refund of balance amount of ₹ 23,98,178/-. The High Court has held that insofar as the amount of ₹ 17.50 lakhs is concerned, the sum was deposited pursuant to the in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

quence thereof, the Department had encashed the Bank Guarantee. Therefore, insofar as this amount is concerned, doctrine of unjust enrichment was applied. Against this order, the present special leave petition was filed in which leave was granted and that is how the present appeal arises for consideration as to whether the High Court order rejecting the refund in the sum of ₹ 23,98,178/- is valid or not. It cannot be disputed that the doctrine of unjust enrichment as incorporated by Sectio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version