<?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>2023 (11) TMI 727 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445836</link>
    <description>The HC addressed a challenge to a show cause notice under the Customs Act, 1962, regarding jurisdiction. The petitioner argued the import was &quot;Free&quot; and missed the response deadline. The Court extended the response time by two weeks and instructed the adjudicating authority to consider the jurisdiction issue, providing a reasoned order within four weeks. The petitioner could raise all points during the hearing. The Court directed no further proceedings until a jurisdiction decision was made. The petitioner could apply for provisional release of goods, which the authority must consider, despite the goods being claimed as prohibited by the respondent. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 20 Nov 2023 18:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=732432" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (11) TMI 727 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445836</link>
      <description>The HC addressed a challenge to a show cause notice under the Customs Act, 1962, regarding jurisdiction. The petitioner argued the import was &quot;Free&quot; and missed the response deadline. The Court extended the response time by two weeks and instructed the adjudicating authority to consider the jurisdiction issue, providing a reasoned order within four weeks. The petitioner could raise all points during the hearing. The Court directed no further proceedings until a jurisdiction decision was made. The petitioner could apply for provisional release of goods, which the authority must consider, despite the goods being claimed as prohibited by the respondent. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=445836</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>