<?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>2025 (7) TMI 580 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774512</link>
    <description>Repeated failure to comply with lawful Customs summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act can support prosecution for the resulting offence when no legally sustainable excuse is shown. The Allahabad HC found that the record reflected repeated non-appearance despite several summons, and the material did not establish a continuing serious medical incapacity throughout the relevant period. A belated request to appear through a representative or by video conferencing, not first raised before the investigating authority, did not by itself invalidate the summoning process, though such a request could still be considered by the authority or trial court in accordance with law. No jurisdictional error or illegality was shown, and the application was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Jul 2025 08:39:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=834974" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 580 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774512</link>
      <description>Repeated failure to comply with lawful Customs summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act can support prosecution for the resulting offence when no legally sustainable excuse is shown. The Allahabad HC found that the record reflected repeated non-appearance despite several summons, and the material did not establish a continuing serious medical incapacity throughout the relevant period. A belated request to appear through a representative or by video conferencing, not first raised before the investigating authority, did not by itself invalidate the summoning process, though such a request could still be considered by the authority or trial court in accordance with law. No jurisdictional error or illegality was shown, and the application was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774512</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>