<?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>2022 (1) TMI 814 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417349</link>
    <description>Preventive detention under COFEPOSA was upheld where fraudulent export activity without actual movement of goods and a related black pepper scheme showed a continuing propensity to engage in smuggling. The Court held that a live and proximate link can be found from the whole chain of conduct and surrounding material, and that such activity falls within the statutory concept of smuggling under the Customs Act, supporting the detaining authority&#039;s subjective satisfaction. It also found no vitiation from any unproved retraction, no prejudice from non-supply of irrelevant or illegible documents, and no breach of Article 22(5) because the representations were duly considered within a reasonable time. The detention order was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Jan 2022 12:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=667816" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 814 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417349</link>
      <description>Preventive detention under COFEPOSA was upheld where fraudulent export activity without actual movement of goods and a related black pepper scheme showed a continuing propensity to engage in smuggling. The Court held that a live and proximate link can be found from the whole chain of conduct and surrounding material, and that such activity falls within the statutory concept of smuggling under the Customs Act, supporting the detaining authority&#039;s subjective satisfaction. It also found no vitiation from any unproved retraction, no prejudice from non-supply of irrelevant or illegible documents, and no breach of Article 22(5) because the representations were duly considered within a reasonable time. The detention order was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417349</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>