<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2012 (6) TMI 30 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213710</link>
    <description>Imported goods cannot be kept under indefinite detention without a prompt statutory decision on assessment, confiscation or provisional release. The Customs Act required the proper officer to assess goods without undue delay and, where regular assessment could not be completed expeditiously, to consider provisional assessment or other lawful action. Section 110A was held to confer discretion, not an absolute right, to provisional release, and that discretion had to be exercised reasonably and promptly. An intellectual property rights notice could justify suspension and examination of the identified goods under the 2007 Rules, but it did not authorise open-ended detention of unrelated goods. Customs authorities were directed to decide the matter expeditiously in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Jun 2012 16:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=187110" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 30 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213710</link>
      <description>Imported goods cannot be kept under indefinite detention without a prompt statutory decision on assessment, confiscation or provisional release. The Customs Act required the proper officer to assess goods without undue delay and, where regular assessment could not be completed expeditiously, to consider provisional assessment or other lawful action. Section 110A was held to confer discretion, not an absolute right, to provisional release, and that discretion had to be exercised reasonably and promptly. An intellectual property rights notice could justify suspension and examination of the identified goods under the 2007 Rules, but it did not authorise open-ended detention of unrelated goods. Customs authorities were directed to decide the matter expeditiously in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=213710</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>