https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42818 Palm Kernel was held not to fall within the import policy entry for Palm seeds before the later amendment, because the two commodities were commercially distinct and the canalised entry could not be expanded by approximation. For warehoused goods, the applicable customs duty rate was held to depend on the date of actual removal from the warehouse under Section 15(1)(b), not merely on the filing of bills of entry. Since the customs authorities wrongly withheld clearance by insisting on an unlawful redemption fine, the Revenue could not rely on its own refusal to impose higher duty. The confiscation and penalty failed, and the importer was entitled to refund of the deposit. en-us Thu, 15 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Jul 2014 12:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42818 Palm Kernel was held not to fall within the import policy entry for Palm seeds before the later amendment, because the two commodities were commercially distinct and the canalised entry could not be expanded by approximation. For warehoused goods, the applicable customs duty rate was held to depend on the date of actual removal from the warehouse under Section 15(1)(b), not merely on the filing of bills of entry. Since the customs authorities wrongly withheld clearance by insisting on an unlawful redemption fine, the Revenue could not rely on its own refusal to impose higher duty. The confiscation and penalty failed, and the importer was entitled to refund of the deposit. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 15 Nov 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42818