https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185123 The appellants imported cosmetics without the requisite registration under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 2010. Despite claiming to have applied for registration, they failed to provide evidence of follow-up action. Subsequently, after obtaining the registration certificate, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication by the Commissioner within 15 days due to the involvement of a line consignment. This case underscores the importance of regulatory compliance, proper documentation, and procedural fairness in legal proceedings concerning seized goods. en-us Mon, 10 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Aug 2016 16:30:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185123 The appellants imported cosmetics without the requisite registration under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 2010. Despite claiming to have applied for registration, they failed to provide evidence of follow-up action. Subsequently, after obtaining the registration certificate, the impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication by the Commissioner within 15 days due to the involvement of a line consignment. This case underscores the importance of regulatory compliance, proper documentation, and procedural fairness in legal proceedings concerning seized goods. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 10 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185123