https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390828 The court allowed the petitions, quashing the Customs Department's order demanding refund of Terminal Excise Duty (TED) sanctioned by DGFT. It held that Customs lacked jurisdiction as DGFT is the proper authority for such matters. The court emphasized the validity of the Advance Authorization and rejected allegations of clandestine clearance, noting the absence of physical verification by Central Excise Officers. It highlighted that the Customs Department exceeded its jurisdiction, justifying the court's intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. en-us Thu, 09 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Nov 2020 18:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390828 The court allowed the petitions, quashing the Customs Department's order demanding refund of Terminal Excise Duty (TED) sanctioned by DGFT. It held that Customs lacked jurisdiction as DGFT is the proper authority for such matters. The court emphasized the validity of the Advance Authorization and rejected allegations of clandestine clearance, noting the absence of physical verification by Central Excise Officers. It highlighted that the Customs Department exceeded its jurisdiction, justifying the court's intervention under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 09 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390828