<?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>Appeal dismissed: Proviso to section 110(2) Customs Act extension of time upheld due to non-cooperation and delay</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94027</link>
    <description>CESTAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the Commissioner&#039;s order extending time under the proviso to section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal found no breach of natural justice: an SCN proposing the extension was served, the appellant&#039;s submissions were recorded and considered (paras 15-16), and reasons for extension were expressly stated. Material reasons included the appellant&#039;s non-cooperation, failure to respond to summons, and active delay of the investigation, together with the need to verify multiple factors including potential contraventions under the Foreign Trade (Development &amp; Regulation) Act, 1992. The extension was held to be justified on the facts and in law; appeal dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2025 08:56:06 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2025 08:56:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=863438" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Appeal dismissed: Proviso to section 110(2) Customs Act extension of time upheld due to non-cooperation and delay</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94027</link>
      <description>CESTAT dismissed the appeal, upholding the Commissioner&#039;s order extending time under the proviso to section 110(2) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Tribunal found no breach of natural justice: an SCN proposing the extension was served, the appellant&#039;s submissions were recorded and considered (paras 15-16), and reasons for extension were expressly stated. Material reasons included the appellant&#039;s non-cooperation, failure to respond to summons, and active delay of the investigation, together with the need to verify multiple factors including potential contraventions under the Foreign Trade (Development &amp; Regulation) Act, 1992. The extension was held to be justified on the facts and in law; appeal dismissed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2025 08:56:06 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94027</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>