<?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>Customs cases pre-deposit relaxation. In Sea Queen sincerity diligence caused loss and doors for justice were unjustifiably closed whereas Techmax by adopting delaying tactics tax payer gained.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=17428</link>
    <description>Mandatory customs pre-deposit under Section 129E is treated as a binding threshold for appeals, with the Commissioner and CESTAT lacking power to admit an appeal without compliance. High Court proceedings may be used to seek judicial consideration of waiver, reduction, or time for payment where financial distress is pleaded. Tecmax received a time-bound opportunity to make the deposit and restore its CESTAT appeal, while Sea Queen, which directly invoked writ jurisdiction claiming inability to pay, was found not to have established an exceptional case. The differing treatment raises concerns about consistent application of financial-distress and exceptional-case standards.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2026 08:25:30 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2026 08:25:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=924276" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Customs cases pre-deposit relaxation. In Sea Queen sincerity diligence caused loss and doors for justice were unjustifiably closed whereas Techmax by adopting delaying tactics tax payer gained.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=17428</link>
      <description>Mandatory customs pre-deposit under Section 129E is treated as a binding threshold for appeals, with the Commissioner and CESTAT lacking power to admit an appeal without compliance. High Court proceedings may be used to seek judicial consideration of waiver, reduction, or time for payment where financial distress is pleaded. Tecmax received a time-bound opportunity to make the deposit and restore its CESTAT appeal, while Sea Queen, which directly invoked writ jurisdiction claiming inability to pay, was found not to have established an exceptional case. The differing treatment raises concerns about consistent application of financial-distress and exceptional-case standards.</description>
      <category>Articles</category>
      <law>Customs - Import - Export - SEZ</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 19 Sep 2026 08:25:30 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=17428</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>