https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760593 HC dismissed the challenge to the public notice dated 24 June 2024, upholding Clause 3(ii) as a valid administrative requirement that an importer must explain identical FOB values between FTA-COO and third-country invoice when filing a self-assessed bill of entry. The court held Clause 3(ii) applies only to identical FOB values, does not conflict with the 2009 Rules, does not infringe petitioners' statutory rights, and does not preclude entitlement to preferential benefits if documentary and rule requirements are met. The petition seeking omnibus relief was refused; entitlement must be determined transaction-wise under applicable law and notifications. en-us Mon, 21 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Sep 2025 14:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760593 HC dismissed the challenge to the public notice dated 24 June 2024, upholding Clause 3(ii) as a valid administrative requirement that an importer must explain identical FOB values between FTA-COO and third-country invoice when filing a self-assessed bill of entry. The court held Clause 3(ii) applies only to identical FOB values, does not conflict with the 2009 Rules, does not infringe petitioners' statutory rights, and does not preclude entitlement to preferential benefits if documentary and rule requirements are met. The petition seeking omnibus relief was refused; entitlement must be determined transaction-wise under applicable law and notifications. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 21 Oct 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=760593