https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409108 A writ petition for release of seized imported goods was premature because the importer had not first made a formal application for provisional release before the Commissioner of Customs. A representation to the investigating authority was not treated as a substitute for invoking the competent authority's jurisdiction. Since the dispute at this stage concerned only provisional release and not the merits of the investigation, the Court required the importer to file a proper application before the Commissioner, who was directed to consider and decide it expeditiously in accordance with law. en-us Tue, 22 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Jan 2022 10:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409108 A writ petition for release of seized imported goods was premature because the importer had not first made a formal application for provisional release before the Commissioner of Customs. A representation to the investigating authority was not treated as a substitute for invoking the competent authority's jurisdiction. Since the dispute at this stage concerned only provisional release and not the merits of the investigation, the Court required the importer to file a proper application before the Commissioner, who was directed to consider and decide it expeditiously in accordance with law. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 22 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409108