https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84348 Customs authorities should not abruptly depart from a consistent clearance practice to the detriment of an importer where similar goods had earlier been allowed clearance and no advance public notice preceded the change. On the facts noted, the importer had opened the letter of credit before the departmental clarification relied upon by revenue, and the existing understanding at the Custom House supported the import. The stated legal point is that a prejudicial shift in customs treatment should be accompanied by prior notice, and redemption fine may be remitted where the importer acted on the prevailing practice. en-us Thu, 07 Oct 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Jul 2011 13:08:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84348 Customs authorities should not abruptly depart from a consistent clearance practice to the detriment of an importer where similar goods had earlier been allowed clearance and no advance public notice preceded the change. On the facts noted, the importer had opened the letter of credit before the departmental clarification relied upon by revenue, and the existing understanding at the Custom House supported the import. The stated legal point is that a prejudicial shift in customs treatment should be accompanied by prior notice, and redemption fine may be remitted where the importer acted on the prevailing practice. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 07 Oct 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84348