<?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>2014 (1) TMI 15 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241790</link>
    <description>The Bombay High Court directed the customs authorities to promptly process applications for reducing Extra Duty Deposit (EDD) from 5% to 1% for imports from related parties pending finalization of Bills of Entry. The court emphasized that any lack of information was the petitioners&#039; responsibility, but the authorities should not unduly delay the decision-making process. The directive aimed to ensure a timely resolution of the pending applications in accordance with the law, without imposing costs on either party.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2015 12:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=341431" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 15 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241790</link>
      <description>The Bombay High Court directed the customs authorities to promptly process applications for reducing Extra Duty Deposit (EDD) from 5% to 1% for imports from related parties pending finalization of Bills of Entry. The court emphasized that any lack of information was the petitioners&#039; responsibility, but the authorities should not unduly delay the decision-making process. The directive aimed to ensure a timely resolution of the pending applications in accordance with the law, without imposing costs on either party.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241790</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>