Alternative statutory remedy and unexplained delay barred writ review of customs confiscation adjudication, leaving merits for appellate consideration...
Authorised courier due diligence protects against penalties where declared exports conceal prohibited goods despite proper documentation and customs p...
Customs-controlled container movement now extends to DP World facilities, subject to segregation, inspections, reconciliation, and EXIM cargo priority...
Classification dispute for imported goods under Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Appellant declared details, goods physically examined. No wilful suppression of facts attributable for Section 28(4) applicability. Earlier, Customs authorities permitted clearance under appellant's classification. Commissioner held Section 28(4) invoking provisions inapplicable, being a case of misclassification only. Correct classification accepted, differential duty paid upon informing. Impugned order set aside by Appellate Tribunal, appeal allowed.
Classification dispute for imported goods under Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Appellant declared details, goods physically examined. No wilful suppression of facts attributable for Section 28(4) applicability. Earlier, Customs authorities permitted clearance under appellant's classification. Commissioner held Section 28(4) invoking provisions inapplicable, being a case of misclassification only. Correct classification accepted, differential duty paid upon informing. Impugned order set aside by Appellate Tribunal, appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
