<?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 (8) TMI 640 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331256</link>
    <description>The court directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner&#039;s representation for re-assessment of customs duty exemption diligently, ensuring adherence to legal requirements and providing the petitioner with a personal hearing. The judgment did not delve into the merits but emphasized proper consideration and decision-making in line with legal procedures. No costs were imposed, and the writ petition was disposed of with this directive.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2016 10:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=438524" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 640 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331256</link>
      <description>The court directed the second respondent to consider the petitioner&#039;s representation for re-assessment of customs duty exemption diligently, ensuring adherence to legal requirements and providing the petitioner with a personal hearing. The judgment did not delve into the merits but emphasized proper consideration and decision-making in line with legal procedures. No costs were imposed, and the writ petition was disposed of with this directive.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331256</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>