<?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 (7) TMI 920 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249884</link>
    <description>The High Court directed the second respondent to refrain from taking coercive recovery actions for disputed duty and penalty from the petitioners until the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) decided on the stay application. The writ petitions were disposed of without costs, and related miscellaneous petitions were closed following the judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 Jul 2014 10:20:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=360687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (7) TMI 920 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249884</link>
      <description>The High Court directed the second respondent to refrain from taking coercive recovery actions for disputed duty and penalty from the petitioners until the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) decided on the stay application. The writ petitions were disposed of without costs, and related miscellaneous petitions were closed following the judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=249884</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>