Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Sansar Texturisers Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India & Ors (Bombay High Court)
Appeal Number : Writ Petition No. 343 of 2024
Date of Judgement/Order : 22/01/2024
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Sansar Texturisers Pvt Ltd Vs Union of India & Ors (Bombay High Court)

Bombay High Court held that normally a writ petition for a simplicitor money claim would not be maintainable. Accordingly, writ petition, for refund of money of anti-dumping duty paid under the grab of challenge to notification, is unmaintainable.

Facts- The present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, although challenges the validity of the notifications dated 13 January, 2012 and 19 January, 2017 issued by the respondents providing for a levy of anti-dumping duty, the real intention of the petitioner is to avail refund of anti-dumping duty paid by the petitioner in relation to the imports of the petitioner for the period from 13 January, 2012 to 12 January, 2018.

Conclusion- It was observed that it is a well recognised principle of jurisprudence that a right not exercised for a long time is non-existent. Even when there is no limitation period prescribed by any statute relating to certain proceedings, in such cases, courts have coined the doctrine of laches and delay as well as doctrine of acquiescence and non-suited the litigants who approached the court belatedly without any justifiable explanation for bringing the action after unreasonable delay.

Held that the principles of law as laid down by the Supreme Court are well settled namely that normally a writ petition for a simplicitor money claim would not be maintainable. In Suganmal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has observed that the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution solely praying for issue of a writ of mandamus directing the State to refund the money, is not ordinarily maintainable for the simple reason that a prayer for such a refund can always be made in a suit against the authority which had illegally collected money as a tax.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031