<?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>2010 (6) TMI 198 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77885</link>
    <description>The High Court directed the Revenue to return the original bank guarantee worth Rs.89 crore to the petitioner by a specified date. The court emphasized the lack of justification for withholding the substantial bank guarantee, as the penalty had been paid and there was no other financial liability against the petitioner.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116040" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (6) TMI 198 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77885</link>
      <description>The High Court directed the Revenue to return the original bank guarantee worth Rs.89 crore to the petitioner by a specified date. The court emphasized the lack of justification for withholding the substantial bank guarantee, as the penalty had been paid and there was no other financial liability against the petitioner.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77885</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>