https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401332 The Court upheld the interim order refusing unconditional release of seized goods, leading to the continuation of the goods' seizure. The appellant contested the Department's demand for an additional Rs. 25,00,000 despite already paying Rs. 20,72,000 towards the claimed differential duty. Allegations of arbitrary valuation, discrepancies in invoices, undervaluation of imported goods, provisional assessment, and the validity of the provisional release order were addressed. The Court affirmed the provisional release order's validity and clarified that release could be through a bond or Bank Guarantee, rejecting the appeal and highlighting cost implications for the parties. en-us Wed, 25 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Jul 2021 18:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401332 The Court upheld the interim order refusing unconditional release of seized goods, leading to the continuation of the goods' seizure. The appellant contested the Department's demand for an additional Rs. 25,00,000 despite already paying Rs. 20,72,000 towards the claimed differential duty. Allegations of arbitrary valuation, discrepancies in invoices, undervaluation of imported goods, provisional assessment, and the validity of the provisional release order were addressed. The Court affirmed the provisional release order's validity and clarified that release could be through a bond or Bank Guarantee, rejecting the appeal and highlighting cost implications for the parties. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 25 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401332