https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783619 Perishable imported goods were protected by interim procedural directions while the customs dispute remained pending. The Madras HC did not decide the classification issue or the legality of the seizure notice, but ordered a personal hearing, required the authority to consider the petitioner's explanation and materials, and directed a time-bound final decision. It also restrained seizure of the subject goods until the competent authority passed its order, thereby preserving the goods and balancing the parties' interests pending adjudication by the customs authority. en-us Mon, 15 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Dec 2025 08:30:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783619 Perishable imported goods were protected by interim procedural directions while the customs dispute remained pending. The Madras HC did not decide the classification issue or the legality of the seizure notice, but ordered a personal hearing, required the authority to consider the petitioner's explanation and materials, and directed a time-bound final decision. It also restrained seizure of the subject goods until the competent authority passed its order, thereby preserving the goods and balancing the parties' interests pending adjudication by the customs authority. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 15 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=783619