https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119207 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the termination of Custodianship by the Commissioner. It found that the appellant had not violated conditions specified in Public Notices and that delays in clearance should not lead to termination. The premature termination before passing an adjudication order was deemed a violation of Natural Justice principles. The Tribunal emphasized the appellant's significant investment and upheld their right to retain Custodianship, highlighting the importance of complying with Public Notice conditions and protecting the appellant's rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. en-us Wed, 07 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Jul 2012 16:46:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119207 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the termination of Custodianship by the Commissioner. It found that the appellant had not violated conditions specified in Public Notices and that delays in clearance should not lead to termination. The premature termination before passing an adjudication order was deemed a violation of Natural Justice principles. The Tribunal emphasized the appellant's significant investment and upheld their right to retain Custodianship, highlighting the importance of complying with Public Notice conditions and protecting the appellant's rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 07 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119207