https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426883 The court quashed the order denying the refund of encashed bank guarantees to the petitioner. It was found that the encashment was unjustified as there was a stay on the demand during the appeal process, and the petitioner did not avail provisional release of goods. The respondents were directed to remit the amount of the bank guarantees to the petitioner within three weeks, with the understanding that recovery could only happen if the petitioner failed in the appeal or subsequent proceedings before a higher court. The writ petition was disposed of with the quashing of the impugned order. en-us Mon, 22 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Aug 2022 08:17:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426883 The court quashed the order denying the refund of encashed bank guarantees to the petitioner. It was found that the encashment was unjustified as there was a stay on the demand during the appeal process, and the petitioner did not avail provisional release of goods. The respondents were directed to remit the amount of the bank guarantees to the petitioner within three weeks, with the understanding that recovery could only happen if the petitioner failed in the appeal or subsequent proceedings before a higher court. The writ petition was disposed of with the quashing of the impugned order. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 22 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426883