https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343004 The court held that for a customs duty notification to be effective, it must be published and offered for sale on the date of its issue. As the notification in question was not published and offered for sale on the same day it was issued, it could not be applied retrospectively to goods already cleared. The court quashed the communication directing the petitioner to deposit the differential customs duty, ruling in favor of the petitioner based on the interpretation of Section 25(4)(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962. en-us Mon, 10 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Nov 2017 12:32:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343004 The court held that for a customs duty notification to be effective, it must be published and offered for sale on the date of its issue. As the notification in question was not published and offered for sale on the same day it was issued, it could not be applied retrospectively to goods already cleared. The court quashed the communication directing the petitioner to deposit the differential customs duty, ruling in favor of the petitioner based on the interpretation of Section 25(4)(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 10 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=343004