https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791843 The statutory scheme required notice of proposed suspension or cancellation of an importer-exporter code, disclosure of grounds, and a reasonable opportunity to respond and be heard; administrative action taken without those safeguards was held invalid and quashed. By contrast, a challenge to an order cancelling scrips and imposing penalty fell within the statutory appellate channel, so writ jurisdiction was not the appropriate forum and the party was relegated to the alternative remedy. The text thus distinguishes between mandatory pre-decisional safeguards for code-related action and the normal rule of exhaustion of statutory appeal for cancellation and penalty orders. en-us Thu, 14 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 May 2026 12:31:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791843 The statutory scheme required notice of proposed suspension or cancellation of an importer-exporter code, disclosure of grounds, and a reasonable opportunity to respond and be heard; administrative action taken without those safeguards was held invalid and quashed. By contrast, a challenge to an order cancelling scrips and imposing penalty fell within the statutory appellate channel, so writ jurisdiction was not the appropriate forum and the party was relegated to the alternative remedy. The text thus distinguishes between mandatory pre-decisional safeguards for code-related action and the normal rule of exhaustion of statutory appeal for cancellation and penalty orders. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 14 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791843