https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204579 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner on all three issues raised in the case. It held that the recovery proceedings initiated under Section 142(1)(c)(ii) of the Customs Act could not be applied retrospectively to the subsequent purchaser. Additionally, as there was no written approval from the Commissioner of Customs for recovery from the petitioner, the proceedings were deemed unauthorized. The court criticized the Customs Department for its delay and inaction, ultimately setting aside the impugned proceedings and emphasizing the importance of timely action. No costs were awarded in the case. en-us Tue, 01 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Jan 2012 17:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204579 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner on all three issues raised in the case. It held that the recovery proceedings initiated under Section 142(1)(c)(ii) of the Customs Act could not be applied retrospectively to the subsequent purchaser. Additionally, as there was no written approval from the Commissioner of Customs for recovery from the petitioner, the proceedings were deemed unauthorized. The court criticized the Customs Department for its delay and inaction, ultimately setting aside the impugned proceedings and emphasizing the importance of timely action. No costs were awarded in the case. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 01 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204579