https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751157 CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding the appellant's relinquishment of title to warehoused goods valid. The tribunal found the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not applying amendments to section 68 (proviso inserted 2003, amended 2016) which extend the time to relinquish title until an order for clearance for home consumption is made. Issuance of an SCN under section 72(1)(b) does not stop that time. A penalty of Rs.20,000 was already imposed and deposited. en-us Mon, 08 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Sep 2025 14:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751157 CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding the appellant's relinquishment of title to warehoused goods valid. The tribunal found the Commissioner (Appeals) erred in not applying amendments to section 68 (proviso inserted 2003, amended 2016) which extend the time to relinquish title until an order for clearance for home consumption is made. Issuance of an SCN under section 72(1)(b) does not stop that time. A penalty of Rs.20,000 was already imposed and deposited. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 08 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751157