Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
Classification dispute over imported goods - whether categorized as freely importable silver jewelry or restricted under ITC (HS) Code 71069210. Apex court reiterated writ jurisdiction under Articles 32 and 226 is extraordinary, equitable, and discretionary, requiring petitioner to approach court with clean hands, candid disclosure without concealment. Petitioner made false averments about being a registered partnership firm, misleading the court. Held that petitioner abused legal process, not entitled to extraordinary relief. Petition dismissed for lack of candor and suppression of facts.
Classification dispute over imported goods - whether categorized as freely importable silver jewelry or restricted under ITC (HS) Code 71069210. Apex court reiterated writ jurisdiction under Articles 32 and 226 is extraordinary, equitable, and discretionary, requiring petitioner to approach court with clean hands, candid disclosure without concealment. Petitioner made false averments about being a registered partnership firm, misleading the court. Held that petitioner abused legal process, not entitled to extraordinary relief. Petition dismissed for lack of candor and suppression of facts.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.