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...
The writ petition filed by the petitioner against the first respondent is dismissed. The HC held the impugned order was challenged on grounds of limitation under s.28 of the Customs Act and on alleged non-consideration of departmental sample test reports, but found these to raise disputed questions of fact and mixed law requiring fact-finding. Such issues fall within the statutory appellate remit under s.129A and are not amenable to writ relief under Article 226. The petitioner, having subjected itself to the jurisdiction of the officer in Maharashtra, cannot invoke a different HC forum; the appropriate remedy is appeal before the designated appellate authority. Accordingly, the writ is rejected.
The writ petition filed by the petitioner against the first respondent is dismissed. The HC held the impugned order was challenged on grounds of limitation under s.28 of the Customs Act and on alleged non-consideration of departmental sample test reports, but found these to raise disputed questions of fact and mixed law requiring fact-finding. Such issues fall within the statutory appellate remit under s.129A and are not amenable to writ relief under Article 226. The petitioner, having subjected itself to the jurisdiction of the officer in Maharashtra, cannot invoke a different HC forum; the appropriate remedy is appeal before the designated appellate authority. Accordingly, the writ is rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
