<?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>2012 (10) TMI 195 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217243</link>
    <description>The Court directed the second respondent to reconsider the matter, taking into account the correct conversion table and ensuring uniformity with the formula used in other Ports. The second respondent was instructed to re-assess the refund entitlement of the petitioner promptly, within two months of receiving the judgment copy, leading to the disposal of the Writ Petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Oct 2012 16:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190620" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 195 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217243</link>
      <description>The Court directed the second respondent to reconsider the matter, taking into account the correct conversion table and ensuring uniformity with the formula used in other Ports. The second respondent was instructed to re-assess the refund entitlement of the petitioner promptly, within two months of receiving the judgment copy, leading to the disposal of the Writ Petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217243</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>