<?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>2007 (9) TMI 8 - HIGH COURT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1746</link>
    <description>Interim customs relief was granted for imported PU coated fabric by permitting provisional release on the declared thickness and valuation of US$ 1.90 per meter, supported by prior clearances and the cited customs circular, with security required to protect revenue pending adjudication. The court also held that seizure of Indian currency and restraint on a bank balance could not be sustained merely on a valuation dispute or alleged under-invoicing, because the record showed sale proceeds of goods imported and cleared in the ordinary course, not proceeds of smuggled goods. An undertaking was required to safeguard restitution if the final adjudication went against the petitioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2015 17:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41136" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (9) TMI 8 - HIGH COURT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1746</link>
      <description>Interim customs relief was granted for imported PU coated fabric by permitting provisional release on the declared thickness and valuation of US$ 1.90 per meter, supported by prior clearances and the cited customs circular, with security required to protect revenue pending adjudication. The court also held that seizure of Indian currency and restraint on a bank balance could not be sustained merely on a valuation dispute or alleged under-invoicing, because the record showed sale proceeds of goods imported and cleared in the ordinary course, not proceeds of smuggled goods. An undertaking was required to safeguard restitution if the final adjudication went against the petitioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1746</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>