https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32588 The Rajasthan HC upheld the customs procedure requiring imported precious cargo to be taken first to the newly appointed custodian's warehouse for segregation, because importers could opt in advance for clearance through the petitioner custodian and have the cargo shifted without charge. It found no real compulsion, unlawful monopoly, or arbitrariness in the arrangement. The Court also held that appointment of more than one custodian under the Customs Act is an enabling power, and that operational arrangements for handling precious cargo are a matter of regulatory policy. In judicial review under Article 226, such policy choices will not be interfered with absent legal infirmity. en-us Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 14 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32588 The Rajasthan HC upheld the customs procedure requiring imported precious cargo to be taken first to the newly appointed custodian's warehouse for segregation, because importers could opt in advance for clearance through the petitioner custodian and have the cargo shifted without charge. It found no real compulsion, unlawful monopoly, or arbitrariness in the arrangement. The Court also held that appointment of more than one custodian under the Customs Act is an enabling power, and that operational arrangements for handling precious cargo are a matter of regulatory policy. In judicial review under Article 226, such policy choices will not be interfered with absent legal infirmity. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32588