<?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>2011 (3) TMI 344 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205142</link>
    <description>The court quashed the office memorandum/press release and policy circular as they were not issued in accordance with the law. However, the notification allowing export under a license from a certain date was upheld. Petitioners not granted EARC were directed to seek licenses for export, dismissing their claim for vested rights. The court emphasized the need for legal procedures to be followed in imposing export restrictions under the relevant act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 16:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=178665" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 344 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205142</link>
      <description>The court quashed the office memorandum/press release and policy circular as they were not issued in accordance with the law. However, the notification allowing export under a license from a certain date was upheld. Petitioners not granted EARC were directed to seek licenses for export, dismissing their claim for vested rights. The court emphasized the need for legal procedures to be followed in imposing export restrictions under the relevant act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205142</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>