https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115361 Customs duty demand could not be sustained where the competent authority had endorsed the import licence by deleting the value restriction and the importer acted on that amended licence. In the absence of importer misrepresentation, suppression, or collusion, the revenue could not rely on a departmental mistake or import policy to impose liability after the importer had altered its position to its prejudice. A subsequent clarification could not override the licence position governing the import transaction. The show cause notice and customs demand process were quashed. en-us Wed, 04 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 May 2024 12:22:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115361 Customs duty demand could not be sustained where the competent authority had endorsed the import licence by deleting the value restriction and the importer acted on that amended licence. In the absence of importer misrepresentation, suppression, or collusion, the revenue could not rely on a departmental mistake or import policy to impose liability after the importer had altered its position to its prejudice. A subsequent clarification could not override the licence position governing the import transaction. The show cause notice and customs demand process were quashed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 04 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115361