SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(SC) 145

B.P.JEEVAN REDDY, K.VENKATASWAMI
Collector Of Central Excise – Appellant
Versus
Hyderabad Plywood Industry – Respondent


(1) IN this case, the respondent-assessee filed a refund claim which application was returned to be resubmitted in the prescribed form. Instead of resubmitting the refund application in the prescribed form, the respondent filed a writ petition in the High court which has been allowed. It appears that the writ petition was preferred beyond the period of six months prescribed by the central Excise Rules, 1944 for filing the refund claim. In this view of the matter, the appeal is allowed and the judgment of the High Court is set aside. The Revenue shall be entitled to enforce the bank guarantee and shall be entitled to recover the duty due in accordance with law.

(2) NO costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top