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...
Revision application u/s 264 was initially rejected due to non-payment of mandatory fee of Rs. 500. However, the petitioner paid the fee immediately upon objection raised. The court held that the statutory requirement of Section 264(5) was sufficiently complied with by payment of fees, even if the filing date is considered as the date of fee payment. The decision relied upon by the respondent was inapplicable as no fees were paid in that case, whereas in the present case, fees were paid upon objection. The impugned order rejecting the revision application on technical grounds was quashed and the matter remanded to decide on merits after providing an opportunity of hearing within 12 weeks.
Revision application u/s 264 was initially rejected due to non-payment of mandatory fee of Rs. 500. However, the petitioner paid the fee immediately upon objection raised. The court held that the statutory requirement of Section 264(5) was sufficiently complied with by payment of fees, even if the filing date is considered as the date of fee payment. The decision relied upon by the respondent was inapplicable as no fees were paid in that case, whereas in the present case, fees were paid upon objection. The impugned order rejecting the revision application on technical grounds was quashed and the matter remanded to decide on merits after providing an opportunity of hearing within 12 weeks.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
