TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court Orders Provisional Assessment of Dry Dates Import</h1> <h3>M/s. ALEX INTERNATIONAL TRADING Versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS ICD PATPARGANJ & ORS.</h3> M/s. ALEX INTERNATIONAL TRADING Versus PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS ICD PATPARGANJ & ORS. - TMI Issues:1. Provisional assessment of imported goods against a specific bill of entry.2. Release of seized goods without petitioner's knowledge.3. Grant of costs for the petition.Provisional Assessment of Imported Goods:The petitioner sought a writ mandamus to direct the respondents to provisionally or finally assess the imported goods, specifically 'Dry Dates,' against a particular bill of entry. The counsel argued for provisional assessment of the goods in question, emphasizing the urgency of the matter. The court, acknowledging the request, directed the respondent authorities to conduct provisional assessments of the imported goods within a maximum period of two weeks, ensuring compliance with relevant laws, rules, regulations, and government policies. The judgment disposed of the writ petition with this directive.Release of Seized Goods:The petitioner also requested a writ mandamus to provisionally release the seized goods, 'Dry Dates,' imported against the mentioned bill of entry if they were seized without the petitioner's information or knowledge. The court did not address the issue of seized goods explicitly but focused on directing the authorities to conduct provisional assessments promptly. This indicates that the primary concern was the assessment process rather than the release of seized goods without the petitioner's knowledge.Grant of Costs:One of the prayers in the writ petition was the grant of costs. However, the judgment did not explicitly mention any decision regarding the grant of costs. It can be inferred that the court did not find it necessary to address this specific prayer separately, as the main relief sought by the petitioner was the provisional assessment of the imported goods, which was duly addressed in the judgment.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
