https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253850 The court analyzed clauses in the bank guarantees (BGs) and held that the petitioner bank was not obligated to renew the BGs without a beneficiary's request. The presence of a non obstante clause limited the bank's liability to pay the guaranteed amount only upon a written claim before the BG's validity period expired. As no claim was made within that time, the petitioner was not liable to pay. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing adverse communications and enforcement notices from the Customs Authorities, clarifying the petitioner's rights and obligations under the BGs. en-us Mon, 10 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Sep 2017 12:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253850 The court analyzed clauses in the bank guarantees (BGs) and held that the petitioner bank was not obligated to renew the BGs without a beneficiary's request. The presence of a non obstante clause limited the bank's liability to pay the guaranteed amount only upon a written claim before the BG's validity period expired. As no claim was made within that time, the petitioner was not liable to pay. The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, quashing adverse communications and enforcement notices from the Customs Authorities, clarifying the petitioner's rights and obligations under the BGs. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 10 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253850