https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780555 An amended BIS certification relaxation under the Medical Textiles (Quality Control) Order, 2025 was treated as manufacturer-specific, so an importer could not claim the extended compliance period for non-conforming imported goods. The article also states that a writ challenge to the customs adjudication order was not maintainable because an efficacious statutory appeal lay to CESTAT under the Customs Act, and no jurisdictional error, natural justice breach, or apparent record error justified Article 226 interference. The challenge to confiscation and penalty therefore failed, leaving the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy. en-us Fri, 31 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 01 Nov 2025 08:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780555 An amended BIS certification relaxation under the Medical Textiles (Quality Control) Order, 2025 was treated as manufacturer-specific, so an importer could not claim the extended compliance period for non-conforming imported goods. The article also states that a writ challenge to the customs adjudication order was not maintainable because an efficacious statutory appeal lay to CESTAT under the Customs Act, and no jurisdictional error, natural justice breach, or apparent record error justified Article 226 interference. The challenge to confiscation and penalty therefore failed, leaving the petitioner to pursue the appellate remedy. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 31 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780555