COMMR.OF CUSTOMS vs HINDUSTAN ZINC LIMITED THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR — C.A. No. 10691/2011

Case under Section III-B. Status: Disposed.

Disposed

CNR: SCIN010017442011

Filing Date

14-Jan-2011

Registration No

C.A. No. 10691/2011

Diary Number

1744/2011

Order Date

23-Mar-2023

Document Type

ROP - of Main Case

Disposal Type

Dismissed

Last updated 02-Jul-2026

Acts & Sections

Section III-B

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.COMMR.OF CUSTOMS

    Adv. MUKESH KUMAR MARORIA[P-1]

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.HINDUSTAN ZINC LIMITED THROUGH ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

    Adv. M. P. DEVANATH[R-1]

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 23-Mar-2023

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  3. 23-Mar-2023

    Ordinary

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta

  4. 22-Mar-2023

    Ordinary

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta

  5. 16-Mar-2023

    Ordinary

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta

  6. 08-Jan-2020

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  7. 08-Jan-2020

    Fixed Date by Court

    Registrar (J) - II

  8. 24-Oct-2019

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  9. 24-Oct-2019

    Administrative Order

    Registrar (J) - II

  10. 29-Jul-2019

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  11. 29-Jul-2019

    Administrative Order

    Registrar (J) - II

  12. 10-Sep-2018

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  13. 10-Sep-2018

    Fixed Date by Court

    Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul

  14. 16-Aug-2018

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  15. 16-Aug-2018

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  16. 05-Jul-2016

    ROPView PDF

  17. 05-Jul-2016

    Office ReportView PDF

  18. 05-Jul-2016

    ROPView PDF

  19. 16-Mar-2016

    ROPView PDF

  20. 16-Mar-2016

    Office ReportView PDF

  21. 16-Mar-2016

    ROPView PDF

  22. 16-Sep-2015

    ROPView PDF

  23. 16-Sep-2015

    Office ReportView PDF

  24. 16-Sep-2015

    ROPView PDF

  25. 24-Aug-2015

    Office ReportView PDF

  26. 24-Aug-2015

    ROPView PDF

  27. 30-Oct-2014

    ROPView PDF

  28. 30-Oct-2014

    ROPView PDF

  29. 23-Jul-2014

    Office ReportView PDF

  30. 23-Jul-2014

    Office ReportView PDF

  31. 23-Jul-2014

    ROPView PDF

  32. 04-Jul-2014

    ROPView PDF

  33. 02-May-2014

    ROPView PDF

  34. 01-May-2014

    ROPView PDF

  35. 17-Feb-2014

    ROPView PDF

  36. 05-Feb-2014

    ROPView PDF

  37. 30-Jan-2014

    ROPView PDF

  38. 25-Sep-2013

    ROPView PDF

  39. 12-Sep-2013

    ROPView PDF

  40. 08-Aug-2013

    ROPView PDF

  41. 03-May-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  42. 09-Apr-2013

    ROPView PDF

  43. 19-Feb-2013

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  44. 12-Oct-2012

    ROPView PDF

  45. 12-Mar-2012

    ROPView PDF

  46. 02-Dec-2011

    ROPView PDF

  47. 12-Sep-2011

    ROPView PDF

  48. 11-Jul-2011

    ROPView PDF

  49. 09-May-2011

    ROPView PDF

  50. 29-Apr-2011

    ROP - of Main CaseView PDF

  51. 11-Mar-2011

    ROPView PDF

  52. 14-Jan-2011

    Case filed

    Registration No. C.A. No. 10691/2011

  53. 10-Jan-2011

    ROPView PDF

  54. 25-Nov-2010

    ROPView PDF

  55. 12-Jul-2010

    ROPView PDF

  56. 03-May-2010

    ROPView PDF

  57. 26-Apr-2010

    ROPView PDF

  58. 11-Mar-2010

    ROPView PDF

  59. 09-Feb-2010

    ROPView PDF

  60. 10-Dec-2009

    ROPView PDF

  61. 03-Nov-2009

    ROPView PDF

  62. 01-Sep-2009

    ROPView PDF

  63. 17-Apr-2009

    ROPView PDF

View Full Judgment
casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: CA No. 010691/2011 Outcome: The Supreme Court dismissed all revenue (Customs Commissioner) appeals on March 23, 2023. The Court upheld the lower courts' decisions allowing refunds of provisional duties deposited for clearance of imported goods after final assessment, rejecting the Commissioner's challenge. Key Issue: Whether provisional duty deposits can be refunded under Section 18 of the Customs Act after assessment proceedings conclude. The Court held that refund entitlements follow from the statutory adjustment mechanism and are not barred by unjust enrichment doctrine. Next Steps: Two related matters (SLP(C) No. 150/2016 and CA No. 13501/2015) were directed for relisting before a different bench. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts District Courts
Search Another Case