https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429747 The Bombay High Court directed Respondent No.1 to submit the statement of the case within six weeks after finding that Respondent No.2 had not abandoned the application. The court considered the time limit in the Customs Act as directory, not mandatory, to protect parties' statutory rights. Respondent No.1 was given specific follow-up actions to comply with. Regarding the return of the Bank Guarantee of Rs.26,86,000, the court did not order its return immediately due to the petitioner's financial difficulties but allowed for a reapplication after one year if the Customs Application remained unresolved. The judgment concluded without costs awarded. en-us Thu, 20 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Nov 2022 08:51:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429747 The Bombay High Court directed Respondent No.1 to submit the statement of the case within six weeks after finding that Respondent No.2 had not abandoned the application. The court considered the time limit in the Customs Act as directory, not mandatory, to protect parties' statutory rights. Respondent No.1 was given specific follow-up actions to comply with. Regarding the return of the Bank Guarantee of Rs.26,86,000, the court did not order its return immediately due to the petitioner's financial difficulties but allowed for a reapplication after one year if the Customs Application remained unresolved. The judgment concluded without costs awarded. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 20 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429747