https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361708 The court ruled in favor of the writ Court's decision on compensation in a case involving seized diamonds. The appellant's claim for higher compensation was rejected, and a fixed amount of 5,00,000 plus interest was awarded due to the non-return of the diamonds. The judgment highlighted the duty of care and tortious liability of the State in safeguarding seized goods, emphasizing the importance of consistency in claims and the acceptance of valuation decisions. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the compensation amount set by the writ Court. en-us Mon, 04 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Nov 2018 11:54:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361708 The court ruled in favor of the writ Court's decision on compensation in a case involving seized diamonds. The appellant's claim for higher compensation was rejected, and a fixed amount of 5,00,000 plus interest was awarded due to the non-return of the diamonds. The judgment highlighted the duty of care and tortious liability of the State in safeguarding seized goods, emphasizing the importance of consistency in claims and the acceptance of valuation decisions. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the compensation amount set by the writ Court. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 04 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361708