<?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>2024 (9) TMI 716 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758472</link>
    <description>Delhi HC allowed petition challenging detention of platinum alloy sheets consignment. Court held that impugned orders failed to record reasons for doubting COO certificate or belief that imported articles were non-compliant with statutory requirements, violating natural justice principles. Respondents couldn&#039;t justify verification exercise when online real-time verification was available. Bank guarantee demand under Guidelines clause 6(b) was improper as conditions for provisional assessment weren&#039;t established. Court directed respondents to reconsider release of goods expeditiously, emphasizing that recorded reasons form core of jurisprudential fairness doctrine and safeguard against arbitrary power exercise.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Aug 2026 13:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=768091" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 716 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758472</link>
      <description>Delhi HC allowed petition challenging detention of platinum alloy sheets consignment. Court held that impugned orders failed to record reasons for doubting COO certificate or belief that imported articles were non-compliant with statutory requirements, violating natural justice principles. Respondents couldn&#039;t justify verification exercise when online real-time verification was available. Bank guarantee demand under Guidelines clause 6(b) was improper as conditions for provisional assessment weren&#039;t established. Court directed respondents to reconsider release of goods expeditiously, emphasizing that recorded reasons form core of jurisprudential fairness doctrine and safeguard against arbitrary power exercise.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=758472</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>