Topic
The Supreme Court set aside the Jharkhand High Court order, reinstating the quash of a Rs 3.23 million provisional assessment and ruling that a Section 135 assessment can proceed only with proven theft and mens rea. This protects consumers from arbitrary disconnections based merely on suspicion.
CESTAT Chennai rules that Integral Coach Factory’s refund claims for excess excise duty are not barred by unjust enrichment, as state-owned entities engaged in public manufacturing are exempt from this doctrine. Valuation must follow CAS-4 standards, not the Railway Code, affirming that cost-based accounting methods used in batch production are legally valid for duty calculation and refund eligibility.
HP High Court rules that provisional electricity assessments under Section 126 must be preceded by physical inspection and disclosure of MRI data to the consumer, failing which the assessment violates natural justice and is void. This precedent mandates procedural fairness in utility enforcement across India, impacting all electricity boards and consumers facing unauthorized usage allegations.
CESTAT Kolkata rules that anti-dumping duty cannot be levied retrospectively for the period between the lapse of provisional duty and issuance of final duty, reinforcing WTO compliance and Section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act. This protects importers from unexpected financial burdens during assessment gaps.
The Customs Tribunal holds that Section 28 demands are invalid unless assessment is final, overturning penalties for undervaluation where provisional clearance occurred.