<?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>1987 (6) TMI 61 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42270</link>
    <description>A customs show cause notice was quashed where it was issued before the investigation had reached a concluded stage and rested on tentative assumptions rather than established primary facts. The High Court found the recorded grounds incomplete and unsupported by adequate material on alleged unauthorised import, under-invoicing, and misuse of import licences, and held that Section 124 had not been scrupulously followed. Because the notice was also despatched so late that the petitioner&#039;s opportunity to respond within the stipulated time was effectively impaired, the action was held to suffer from non-application of mind and procedural unfairness.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Jun 2010 11:49:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80799" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (6) TMI 61 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42270</link>
      <description>A customs show cause notice was quashed where it was issued before the investigation had reached a concluded stage and rested on tentative assumptions rather than established primary facts. The High Court found the recorded grounds incomplete and unsupported by adequate material on alleged unauthorised import, under-invoicing, and misuse of import licences, and held that Section 124 had not been scrupulously followed. Because the notice was also despatched so late that the petitioner&#039;s opportunity to respond within the stipulated time was effectively impaired, the action was held to suffer from non-application of mind and procedural unfairness.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jun 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42270</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>