https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266761 A writ petition challenging levy of safeguard duty was held maintainable where the dispute went to the very jurisdiction of the authorities and turned on interpretation of the notification rather than disputed facts; availability of statutory remedies for other bills of entry did not bar writ jurisdiction. Interim protection was also granted because the notification excluded certain seamless pipes and tubes and the imported goods appeared to fall within the excluded entries, creating a prima facie case. Relief was balanced against revenue interests by permitting clearance on furnishing a bank guarantee for part of the duty and an undertaking to pay the balance with interest if the petition failed, while the Board was asked to consider the pending representations. en-us Tue, 08 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Feb 2016 11:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266761 A writ petition challenging levy of safeguard duty was held maintainable where the dispute went to the very jurisdiction of the authorities and turned on interpretation of the notification rather than disputed facts; availability of statutory remedies for other bills of entry did not bar writ jurisdiction. Interim protection was also granted because the notification excluded certain seamless pipes and tubes and the imported goods appeared to fall within the excluded entries, creating a prima facie case. Relief was balanced against revenue interests by permitting clearance on furnishing a bank guarantee for part of the duty and an undertaking to pay the balance with interest if the petition failed, while the Board was asked to consider the pending representations. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 08 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=266761