We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic • Quick overview summary answering your query with references• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced • Includes everything in Basic • Detailed report covering: - Overview Summary - Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars] - Relevant Case Laws - Tariff / Classification / HSN - Expert views from TaxTMI - Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
<h1>Customs re-export of detained goods and demurrage waiver request, after s.125 fine order; writ withdrawn with appeal liberty</h1> The dominant issue was whether the writ petition seeking waiver of demurrage/detention charges and permission to re-export should be adjudicated on merits ... Permission for withdrawal of petition - Waiver of demurrage/detention charges accrued on the consignment - permission for re-export of goods - HELD THAT:- When the writ petition came up for hearing today, the petitioner submitted that the Additional Commissioner of Customs, Kochi has by order passed on 10.3.2014 permitted the petitioner to re-export the goods on payment of a fine of ₹ 25,000/- under section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 and also levied a fine of ₹ 5,000/- under section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 and therefore, the writ petition may be disposed of reserving liberty with the petitioner to challenge Ext.P11 report of analysis in other appropriate proceedings. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn, reserving liberty with the petitioner to challenge the report of analysis in appeal before the competent authority as also the order passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs if he is aggrieved thereby, in other appropriate proceedings. A private limited company importing Sodium Tri Poly Phosphate for use in exporting processed sea foods faced action when the consignment was found not to conform to standards under the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006. The Commissioner of Customs issued a show cause notice proposing confiscation. On the importer's request, a sample was sent to the Referral Laboratory, which reported that it 'does not conform to the standards laid down in the Food Safety and Standards (Food Products and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011.' The importer sought waiver of demurrage/detention and penalties and requested permission to re-export, and filed a writ petition challenging the rejection basis and seeking directions for fresh testing and establishment of recognised laboratories. During hearing, it was stated that the Additional Commissioner of Customs had already permitted re-export on payment of a fine under section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 and imposed a penalty under section 112(a). With no opposition, the petition was dismissed as withdrawn, while 'reserving liberty with the petitioner to challenge the report of analysis in appeal before the competent authority' and to challenge the re-export order if aggrieved; all merits contentions were kept open.
TaxTMI 
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
