<?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 (2) TMI 702 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244108</link>
    <description>The court found the imposition of cost recovery charges on the custodian unsustainable, ruling that Regulation 5(2) lacked legal basis. The charges were deemed invalid as they did not qualify as fees for specific services rendered, making them unjustifiable. The court allowed the writ petition, declaring the cost recovery charges unjustified and unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Feb 2014 10:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=346324" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (2) TMI 702 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244108</link>
      <description>The court found the imposition of cost recovery charges on the custodian unsustainable, ruling that Regulation 5(2) lacked legal basis. The charges were deemed invalid as they did not qualify as fees for specific services rendered, making them unjustifiable. The court allowed the writ petition, declaring the cost recovery charges unjustified and unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244108</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>