https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778988 HC held it had territorial jurisdiction and that the challenge was not premature in view of legislative amendments permitting appeal against determinations. Because the appellate tribunal was non-functional, the Court exercised discretionary review despite an alternative remedy. The designated authority committed procedural irregularity by accepting confidential material without adequate non-confidential summaries or affording opportunity to contest confidentiality, violating natural justice. The final findings and consequent levy were quashed and remitted to the designated authority for reconsideration from the stage of the petitioner's response in accordance with Rule 7(2); any levy collected remains subject to the final outcome. Petition disposed. en-us Mon, 22 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Sep 2025 08:26:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778988 HC held it had territorial jurisdiction and that the challenge was not premature in view of legislative amendments permitting appeal against determinations. Because the appellate tribunal was non-functional, the Court exercised discretionary review despite an alternative remedy. The designated authority committed procedural irregularity by accepting confidential material without adequate non-confidential summaries or affording opportunity to contest confidentiality, violating natural justice. The final findings and consequent levy were quashed and remitted to the designated authority for reconsideration from the stage of the petitioner's response in accordance with Rule 7(2); any levy collected remains subject to the final outcome. Petition disposed. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 22 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778988