https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303617 Writ interference under Article 226 was found unwarranted where the statutory appellate authority could examine the legality of the adjudication order, including valuation objections under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007, and could grant appropriate relief such as remand. The challenge to valuation and the complaint of non-compliance with the valuation rules were held to be matters for the appellate forum, not for direct writ intervention. The recorded factual discrepancy between the bill of entry and the goods actually imported further weakened the case for interference. The petition was dismissed, leaving the penalty order and the appeal process, including the pre-deposit requirement, to operate in the statutory framework. en-us Mon, 02 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Aug 2022 21:40:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303617 Writ interference under Article 226 was found unwarranted where the statutory appellate authority could examine the legality of the adjudication order, including valuation objections under the Customs Valuation Rules, 2007, and could grant appropriate relief such as remand. The challenge to valuation and the complaint of non-compliance with the valuation rules were held to be matters for the appellate forum, not for direct writ intervention. The recorded factual discrepancy between the bill of entry and the goods actually imported further weakened the case for interference. The petition was dismissed, leaving the penalty order and the appeal process, including the pre-deposit requirement, to operate in the statutory framework. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 02 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303617