Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
The Calcutta High Court considered a Revision Application regarding the seizure of goods from duty-free shops at an international airport, deemed outside India's territory. Citing the Supreme Court's precedent, the court quashed the proceedings as the complainant lacked authority to initiate them for offenses outside India's customs frontiers. The court allowed the revision, quashing the proceedings under u/s 36(1) of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 u/r 32(3) of the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011.
The Calcutta High Court considered a Revision Application regarding the seizure of goods from duty-free shops at an international airport, deemed outside India's territory. Citing the Supreme Court's precedent, the court quashed the proceedings as the complainant lacked authority to initiate them for offenses outside India's customs frontiers. The court allowed the revision, quashing the proceedings under u/s 36(1) of the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 u/r 32(3) of the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
