https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73947 For limitation under Section 129D of the Customs Act, the relevant date was the order releasing the imported goods under the concessional notification, because that was the operative decision challenged as improper. The later cancellation of the bond was only ancillary to the clearance already granted and did not create a new, legally relevant starting point for limitation. On that basis, the Collector's direction under Section 129D(2) was held within time, and the Revenue's appeal failed. en-us Wed, 24 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Jun 2011 16:34:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73947 For limitation under Section 129D of the Customs Act, the relevant date was the order releasing the imported goods under the concessional notification, because that was the operative decision challenged as improper. The later cancellation of the bond was only ancillary to the clearance already granted and did not create a new, legally relevant starting point for limitation. On that basis, the Collector's direction under Section 129D(2) was held within time, and the Revenue's appeal failed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 24 Feb 1988 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73947