<?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>2016 (6) TMI 751 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329042</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the Writ Petition filed by the appellant challenging the rejection of exemption claim was not maintainable under Article 226 without exhausting the alternative remedy under Section 129-A of the Customs Act. The Court emphasized the importance of utilizing statutory remedies before resorting to writ jurisdiction and dismissed the Writ Petition, granting the appellant liberty to appeal under Section 129-A before the CESTAT within three weeks.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2016 14:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432355" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 751 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329042</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the Writ Petition filed by the appellant challenging the rejection of exemption claim was not maintainable under Article 226 without exhausting the alternative remedy under Section 129-A of the Customs Act. The Court emphasized the importance of utilizing statutory remedies before resorting to writ jurisdiction and dismissed the Writ Petition, granting the appellant liberty to appeal under Section 129-A before the CESTAT within three weeks.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=329042</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>