The Court rejected the State’s objection that an earlier writ petition challenging Section 16(4) barred the present claim, holding that Section 16(5) constitutes a fresh cause of action.

The Tribunal observed that revenue has compared the figures reflected in the ST-3 returns and figures reflected in Form 26AS statement and raised the demand without further examining the reasons for the difference in the two statements.

The Delhi High Court ruled that failure to communicate an extension granted under Section 28(9) of the Customs Act does not invalidate the adjudication proceedings.