<?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>2020 (1) TMI 62 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390449</link>
    <description>The High Court held that redemption of seized currency under Section 125 of the Customs Act must be granted to the owner or the person from whom the goods were seized. The Revisionary Authority&#039;s decision to deny redemption to Petitioner No. 1 was overturned as Petitioner No. 2 was the rightful owner. The Court affirmed that redemption can be allowed even for prohibited goods at the discretion of the authorities, provided there is no perversity or illegality. The High Court criticized the Revisionary Authority for not considering redemption for Petitioner No. 2 and ordered the immediate return of the currency to them, upholding the lower authorities&#039; decisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Dec 2020 10:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=599161" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 62 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390449</link>
      <description>The High Court held that redemption of seized currency under Section 125 of the Customs Act must be granted to the owner or the person from whom the goods were seized. The Revisionary Authority&#039;s decision to deny redemption to Petitioner No. 1 was overturned as Petitioner No. 2 was the rightful owner. The Court affirmed that redemption can be allowed even for prohibited goods at the discretion of the authorities, provided there is no perversity or illegality. The High Court criticized the Revisionary Authority for not considering redemption for Petitioner No. 2 and ordered the immediate return of the currency to them, upholding the lower authorities&#039; decisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390449</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>