<?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 1589 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172891</link>
    <description>The Court directed the petitioner&#039;s representative to appear before the Deputy Commissioner for drawing of a sample in his presence, and required the sample to be forwarded to an Agmark testing centre in accordance with Circular 33 (RE)-2008/2004-09 dated 30 September 2008. The direction focused on compliance with the prescribed sampling and testing procedure for goods. No further relief was considered necessary, and the writ petition was disposed of on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Oct 2017 13:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=395708" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (3) TMI 1589 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172891</link>
      <description>The Court directed the petitioner&#039;s representative to appear before the Deputy Commissioner for drawing of a sample in his presence, and required the sample to be forwarded to an Agmark testing centre in accordance with Circular 33 (RE)-2008/2004-09 dated 30 September 2008. The direction focused on compliance with the prescribed sampling and testing procedure for goods. No further relief was considered necessary, and the writ petition was disposed of on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172891</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>