<?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 (9) TMI 221 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331960</link>
    <description>The Revision Petition was allowed, overturning the conviction and sentence under Section 135 (1) (i) of the Customs Act. The case was remitted to the Appellate Court for a fresh decision, with directions to provide a fair opportunity for both parties to present evidence regarding the market value of the gold involved. The revision petitioner was ordered to appear before the Court on a specified date for further proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2016 17:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=440232" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (9) TMI 221 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331960</link>
      <description>The Revision Petition was allowed, overturning the conviction and sentence under Section 135 (1) (i) of the Customs Act. The case was remitted to the Appellate Court for a fresh decision, with directions to provide a fair opportunity for both parties to present evidence regarding the market value of the gold involved. The revision petitioner was ordered to appear before the Court on a specified date for further proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=331960</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>