https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45920 The court found that the import license possessed by the party was not specifically issued for Aniseed importation, leading to the refusal of clearance by customs authorities. Despite past clearances based on the same license, the court emphasized the need for a specific license for the commodity. The detention of the consignment was justified to uphold correct application of the law and prevent misleading practices. The court modified the redemption fine but upheld penalties, directing the release of goods upon payment. The judgment favored the revenue, highlighting the importance of compliance with specific license requirements. en-us Wed, 28 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Jul 2010 15:52:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45920 The court found that the import license possessed by the party was not specifically issued for Aniseed importation, leading to the refusal of clearance by customs authorities. Despite past clearances based on the same license, the court emphasized the need for a specific license for the commodity. The detention of the consignment was justified to uphold correct application of the law and prevent misleading practices. The court modified the redemption fine but upheld penalties, directing the release of goods upon payment. The judgment favored the revenue, highlighting the importance of compliance with specific license requirements. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 28 Mar 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45920