Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Detention of a passenger's wristwatch by Customs was challenged on the ground that it constituted "personal effects" under the Baggage Rules, 2016 and was therefore not liable to detention. Relying on binding precedent holding that valuables such as jewellery cannot be wholly excluded from "personal effects," the court held that a watch worn by the passenger falls within the ambit of exempt personal effects. Consequently, the continued detention was held untenable and was set aside; Customs was directed to release the watch and warehousing charges were waived. - HC
Detention of a passenger's wristwatch by Customs was challenged on the ground that it constituted "personal effects" under the Baggage Rules, 2016 and was therefore not liable to detention. Relying on binding precedent holding that valuables such as jewellery cannot be wholly excluded from "personal effects," the court held that a watch worn by the passenger falls within the ambit of exempt personal effects. Consequently, the continued detention was held untenable and was set aside; Customs was directed to release the watch and warehousing charges were waived. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.