{"id":60351,"date":"2016-08-06T15:46:44","date_gmt":"2016-08-06T10:16:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=60351"},"modified":"2016-08-20T14:38:31","modified_gmt":"2016-08-20T09:08:31","slug":"2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/","title":{"rendered":"2016 SCC Vol. 6 July 21, 2016 Part 4"},"content":{"rendered":"

Central Excise Act, 1944 \u2014 Ss. 11-B and 11-BB \u2014 Circular dated 30-5-1995, cl. (g) \u2014 Refund \u2014 Liability of the Revenue to pay interest on refund:<\/strong> Under S. 11-BB of the Act, liability of Revenue to pay interest commences from the date of expiry of three months from the date of receipt of application for refund under S. 11-B(1). It is obligatory on the part of the Revenue to intimate the assessee to remove the deficiencies in the application within two days and, in any event, if there are still deficiencies, it can proceed with adjudication and reject the application for refund. Further, the adjudicatory process by no stretch of imagination can be carried on beyond three months and is required to be concluded within three months. [Union of India v. Hamdard (Waqf) Laboratories, (2016) 6 SCC 621<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India \u2014 Art. 136 \u2014 Appeal against cryptic and vague order of High Court: <\/strong>As High Court passed order recording findings of fact without taking note of facts in issue and without identifying point(s) to be decided.\u00a0 Such findings of fact liable to be set aside, if order is appealable. [Ajay Arjun Singh v. Sharadendu Tiwari, (2016) 6 SCC 576<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India \u2014 Art. 254 and Sch. VII List III Entry 42 \u2014 Repugnancy \u2014 Test \u2014 Land Acquisition (Goa Amendment) Act, 2009 (7 of 2009) adding sub-sections (6) to (9) to S. 41 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894:<\/strong> There is no inconsistency between State legislation (Goa Amendment Act) and Central legislation (S. 41 of Land Acquisition Act). State Amendment Act made certain additional provisions regarding modification\/variation or deletion\/subtraction of terms of agreement under S. 41 which were not barred under the Central Act. Where acquisition was made under S. 40(1)(aa) of Land Acquisition Act, deletion of a clause of the agreement, executed under preamended S. 41 prohibiting any construction on acquired land effected by State Amendment Act, would be in furtherance of acquisition under Central Act. Hence, there is no repugnancy between two legislations. [Goa Foundation v. State of Goa, (2016) 6 SCC 602<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India \u2014 Arts. 3 and 4 \u2014 Formation of new States from existing State:<\/strong> When an existing State is bifurcated to form two new States, there must be an equitable bifurcation of the assets and liabilities of the statutory bodies among the two successor States as well, to ensure welfare of the public at large residing within these territories. [A.P. State Council of Higher Education v. Union of India, (2016) 6 SCC 635<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Factories Act, 1948 \u2014 Ss. 92 & 93 r\/w Rr. 88 & 103-A, Bihar Factories Rules, 1950 (as applicable to State of Jharkhand) \u2014 Violation of statutory provisions:<\/strong> Considering serious violations of enactment whose laudable role is to ensure due facilities to labour engaged in factories and to provide measures for regulating emoluments of factory employees, no interference with impugned judgment declining prayer to quash proceedings initiated against appellant employer called for, however, instead of relegating appellants to face protracted trial, penalty of Rs 50,000 each imposed on appellants. [Hemant Madhusudan Nerurkar v. State of Jharkhand, (2016) 6 SCC 504<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Income Tax Act, 1961 \u2014 Ss. 192 and 56(1) \u2014 Tax deducted at source:<\/strong> There is no liability of employer to deduct TDS on tips collected from customers and paid to waiters, etc. working in hotels\/restaurants, etc. [ITC Ltd. v. CIT (TDS), (2016) 6 SCC 652<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 \u2014 Ss. 2(s) & 2(j) \u2014 \u201cWorkman\u201d:<\/strong> Driver employed by school being a skilled person, is \u201cworkman\u201d for purpose of ID Act. [Raj Kumar v. Director of Education, (2016) 6 SCC 541<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 \u2014 Ss. 30(2) and 15(b) \u2014 Applicability of S. 23(2) of Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as amended by S. 15(b) of Amendment Act of 1984 regarding enhanced solatium:<\/strong> Decision of three-Judge Bench in K.S. Paripoornan (2)<\/em>, (1995) 1 SCC 367 not in conflict with that rendered by Constitution Bench in Raghubir Singh<\/em>, (1989) 2 SCC 754. In Raghubir Singh case<\/em>, Court held that benefit of S. 30(2) of 1984 Act would be available only to award by Collector or Court which had been made between 30-4-1982 and 24-9-1984, even in pending reference made before 30-4-1982, so long as award was rendered after 30-4-1982. In Paripoornan <\/em>it was only clarified that S. 23(2) of 1894 Act (as amended) would apply to award of civil court pending at the time when Amendment Act of 1984 came into force i.e. on 24-9-1984 and award was made by court thereafter, which is completely in consonance with law laid down in Raghubir Singh case.<\/em> [Lilawati Agarwal v. State of Jharkhand, (2016) 6 SCC 566<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 \u2014 Ss. 21, 48 r\/w Rr. 37 & 55 and Appendix IV Para (3-A) of LIC (Employees) Pension Rules, 1955 \u2014 Resolution passed by Board:<\/strong> Board can pass Resolution but that does not authorise it to take decisions with regard to matters which are within domain of rule-making authority. S. 48 of 1956 Act clearly envisages that conferment of benefit, either pension or anything ancillary thereto has to be conferred by rules which are to be tabled before Parliament. In absence of Rules no benefit can be granted on basis of resolution proposing amendment to 1995 Rules for upgrading pension, passed by Board i.e. unless resolution is conferred status of Rules as provided under S. 48 of 1956 Act, it cannot become operative. [LIC v. Krishna Murari Lal Asthana, (2016) 6 SCC 515<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 \u2014 Ss. 32 and 33 \u2014 Reservation of posts for differently abled persons: <\/strong>Supreme Court in National Federation of the Blind<\/em>, (2013) 10 SCC 772 held that computation of 3% reservation for differently abled persons was based on total number of vacancies in cadre strength and not on basis of vacancies available in identified posts. High Court by impugned judgment, based on vacancies held that since 3% reservation would work out to 0.27 posts there was no scope for reservation under said category, hence matter remitted to High Court for reconsideration afresh in light of judgment of Supreme Court. [Ashok Kumar Giri v. Union of India, (2016) 6 SCC 511<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Service Law \u2014 Recruitment Process \u2014 Select\/Merit list \u2014 Right to Appointment:<\/strong> Merely because name of candidate finds place in select\/merit list, it does not give him indefeasible right to appointment as well. It is always open to Government not to fill up vacancies. However, such decision should not be arbitrary or unreasonable. Once decision is found to be based on valid reason, mandamus cannot be issued to fill up vacancies. [Kulwinder Pal Singh v. State of Punjab, (2016) 6 SCC 532<\/a>]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Central Excise Act, 1944 \u2014 Ss. 11-B and 11-BB \u2014 Circular dated 30-5-1995, cl. (g) \u2014 Refund \u2014 Liability of the Revenue <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":102451,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-60351","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-supremecourtcases"],"yoast_head":"\n2016 SCC Vol. 6 July 21, 2016 Part 4 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"2016 SCC Vol. 6 July 21, 2016 Part 4\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Central Excise Act, 1944 \u2014 Ss. 11-B and 11-BB \u2014 Circular dated 30-5-1995, cl. (g) \u2014 Refund \u2014 Liability of the Revenue\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2016-08-06T10:16:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-08-20T09:08:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Sucheta\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/\",\"name\":\"2016 SCC Vol. 6 July 21, 2016 Part 4 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2016-08-06T10:16:44+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-08-20T09:08:31+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"2016 SCC Vol. 6 July 21, 2016 Part 4\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa\",\"name\":\"Sucheta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Sucheta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"2016 SCC Vol. 6 July 21, 2016 Part 4 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"2016 SCC Vol. 6 July 21, 2016 Part 4","og_description":"Central Excise Act, 1944 \u2014 Ss. 11-B and 11-BB \u2014 Circular dated 30-5-1995, cl. (g) \u2014 Refund \u2014 Liability of the Revenue","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2016-08-06T10:16:44+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-08-20T09:08:31+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Sucheta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Sucheta","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/","name":"2016 SCC Vol. 6 July 21, 2016 Part 4 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","datePublished":"2016-08-06T10:16:44+00:00","dateModified":"2016-08-20T09:08:31+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/06\/2016-scc-vol-6-july-21-2016-part-4\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"2016 SCC Vol. 6 July 21, 2016 Part 4"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/7416b8c43cd3a0a3412cf97fc17b54fa","name":"Sucheta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/530d4c250404c869212316d6351878b83f86bf27648031b1e6d4857a4bae4b88?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Sucheta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/legal_editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":299608,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/18\/interest-delayed-refunds-to-be-calculated-from-date-of-receipt-application-under-central-excise-act-delhi-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":60351,"position":0},"title":"Interest on delayed refunds to be calculated from the date of receipt of application under Section 11-B of the Central Excise Act, 1944: Delhi High Court","author":"Simranjeet","date":"August 18, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cA levy of interest on refund must undoubtedly follow where it was found that the amount has been unjustifiably retained or remitted with undue delay and thus, the respondents cannot be permitted to retain moneys which are otherwise not due or are otherwise liable to be returned.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":239365,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/19\/cestat-interest-on-delayed-refund-under-the-provisions-of-s-27a-of-customs-act-1962-does-not-arise-tribunal-allows-appeal\/","url_meta":{"origin":60351,"position":1},"title":"CESTAT | Interest on delayed refund under the provisions of S. 27A of Customs Act, 1962 does not arise; Tribunal allows appeal","author":"Editor","date":"November 19, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Customs, Excise and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT): P. Venkata Subba Rao (Technical Member) allowed an appeal which was filed against the judgment of Commissioner (Appeals). The appellant imported Benzothiazole through Visakhapatnam Port declaring an assessable value of US$ 3.5 per Kg being the transaction value. The Assistant Commissioner enhanced\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/09\/CESTAT-Taxscan.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":348351,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/20\/enacshment-bank-guarantee-offered-as-security-not-payment-of-custom-duty-supreme-court-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":60351,"position":2},"title":"Encashment of bank guarantees offered as security cannot be treated as payment of customs duty: Supreme Court","author":"Sucheta","date":"May 20, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cUnder the scheme of the Customs Act, 1962, duty is assessed provisionally or finally whereafter an assessment order or order-in-original is passed. Post assessment order or order-in-original, the concerned importer is required to pay the assessed duty\u201d.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Encashment bank guarantees payment customs duty","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Encashment-bank-guarantees-payment-customs-duty-scaled.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Encashment-bank-guarantees-payment-customs-duty-scaled.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Encashment-bank-guarantees-payment-customs-duty-scaled.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Encashment-bank-guarantees-payment-customs-duty-scaled.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Encashment-bank-guarantees-payment-customs-duty-scaled.webp?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Encashment-bank-guarantees-payment-customs-duty-scaled.webp?resize=1400%2C800&ssl=1 4x"},"classes":[]},{"id":359599,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/09\/10\/bom-hc-orders-refund-of-stamp-duty-refund-despite-delayed-application-limitation\/","url_meta":{"origin":60351,"position":3},"title":"Bombay HC orders refund of stamp duty despite application being filed beyond 5 years limitation period","author":"Editor","date":"September 10, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cWithout the deed of cancellation, the petitioner could not have sought refund of the stamp duty, and to deny the refund of the stamp duty to the petitioner was wholly unjustified and inequitable.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"stamp duty refund despite delayed application","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/stamp-duty-refund-despite-delayed-application.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/stamp-duty-refund-despite-delayed-application.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/stamp-duty-refund-despite-delayed-application.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/stamp-duty-refund-despite-delayed-application.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":358450,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/30\/2025-scc-vol-7-part-2-latest-supreme-court-cases\/","url_meta":{"origin":60351,"position":4},"title":"2025 SCC Vol. 7 Part 2","author":"Editor","date":"August 30, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"2025 SCC Vol. 7 Part 2: Explore the latest Supreme Court Cases on Constitution, Criminal Law, Succession Act, Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, Negotiable Instruments Act, and Stamp Act.","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"2025 SCC Vol. 7 Part 2","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/2025-SCC-Vol.-7-Part-2.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/2025-SCC-Vol.-7-Part-2.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/2025-SCC-Vol.-7-Part-2.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/2025-SCC-Vol.-7-Part-2.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":280868,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/03\/refund-under-rule-5-refund-under-section-11b-within-ambit-section-bb-interest-payable-delay-sanctioning-refund-under-rule-5-legal-new-legal-research-updates-cestat-cenvat-credit-rules\/","url_meta":{"origin":60351,"position":5},"title":"\u2018Commissioner ought to have followed Supreme Court’s Ranbaxy Laboratories verdict\u2019; CESTAT grants interest on delayed sanction of Refund claim under Rule 5 of CENVAT Credit Rules","author":"Editor","date":"January 3, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cWhen series of decisions of Constitutional Courts are available then the Principle of Judicial discipline cast a duty on me to follow those and nothing else\u201d, observed the Tribunal.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"CESTAT","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image99.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60351","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=60351"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/60351\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/102451"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=60351"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=60351"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=60351"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}