https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266758 Where alleged non-compliance with EPCG import conditions had not yet been finally determined by the competent authority, the show cause notice and allied adjudicatory proceedings were not quashed and the importer was directed to respond before that authority. However, bank guarantees furnished for the import could not be invoked before breach was first established and the resulting liability quantified. In the absence of any final determination or quantified demand, coercive encashment was held unsustainable and was set aside. The proceedings on the alleged breach were left open for decision on the merits by the competent authority, but recovery through guarantee invocation was interdicted until liability was determined. en-us Wed, 11 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 31 Dec 2015 16:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266758 Where alleged non-compliance with EPCG import conditions had not yet been finally determined by the competent authority, the show cause notice and allied adjudicatory proceedings were not quashed and the importer was directed to respond before that authority. However, bank guarantees furnished for the import could not be invoked before breach was first established and the resulting liability quantified. In the absence of any final determination or quantified demand, coercive encashment was held unsustainable and was set aside. The proceedings on the alleged breach were left open for decision on the merits by the competent authority, but recovery through guarantee invocation was interdicted until liability was determined. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 11 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266758