<?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>2015 (12) TMI 536 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269232</link>
    <description>The court allowed the Writ Petition, directing the Respondents to return the seized amount within two weeks as there was no evidence linking it to illegal activities. The court emphasized the need for following legal procedures and providing substantial evidence before confiscating any property, setting aside the dismissal of the Petitioner&#039;s appeal by the appellate authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Feb 2016 16:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=408464" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 536 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269232</link>
      <description>The court allowed the Writ Petition, directing the Respondents to return the seized amount within two weeks as there was no evidence linking it to illegal activities. The court emphasized the need for following legal procedures and providing substantial evidence before confiscating any property, setting aside the dismissal of the Petitioner&#039;s appeal by the appellate authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269232</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>