<?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 (10) TMI 334 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333314</link>
    <description>The court held that the petitioner was not liable to pay customs duty as they did not opt to redeem the confiscated goods, following the principle that duty is payable only upon exercising the redemption option. The court quashed the orders demanding redemption fine and duty, allowing the writ petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2017 11:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=444265" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 334 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333314</link>
      <description>The court held that the petitioner was not liable to pay customs duty as they did not opt to redeem the confiscated goods, following the principle that duty is payable only upon exercising the redemption option. The court quashed the orders demanding redemption fine and duty, allowing the writ petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333314</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>