<?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>Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate remedy.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=102504</link>
    <description>Separate customs show-cause notices arising from the same investigation retain independent statutory foundations and do not merge merely because they are assigned to one adjudicating authority or heard together. An interim stay confined to proceedings under the notice relating to earlier imports therefore did not bar adjudication under the distinct notice concerning seized goods. Challenges alleging non-supply of relied-upon documents, inadequate hearing and prejudice required examination of the adjudication record and were left to the effective statutory appellate remedy before CESTAT. The interim stay on adjudication of the earlier-import notice was vacated; limitation, Call Book treatment and extension issues remained open, subject to an effective hearing and compliance with natural justice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2026 10:26:34 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2026 10:26:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=916119" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate remedy.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=102504</link>
      <description>Separate customs show-cause notices arising from the same investigation retain independent statutory foundations and do not merge merely because they are assigned to one adjudicating authority or heard together. An interim stay confined to proceedings under the notice relating to earlier imports therefore did not bar adjudication under the distinct notice concerning seized goods. Challenges alleging non-supply of relied-upon documents, inadequate hearing and prejudice required examination of the adjudication record and were left to the effective statutory appellate remedy before CESTAT. The interim stay on adjudication of the earlier-import notice was vacated; limitation, Call Book treatment and extension issues remained open, subject to an effective hearing and compliance with natural justice.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 08 Aug 2026 10:26:34 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=102504</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>