<?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 (11) TMI 680 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334662</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the Writ Petition, quashing the communication dated 1-3-2016 regarding the alleged smuggling activities involving the petitioner. Lack of evidence establishing her involvement led to the decision to invalidate the communication, stressing the necessity of prima facie evidence before taking consequential actions. Fair treatment and protection of individuals&#039; rights were emphasized in the judgment.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Nov 2016 10:13:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448306" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 680 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334662</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the Writ Petition, quashing the communication dated 1-3-2016 regarding the alleged smuggling activities involving the petitioner. Lack of evidence establishing her involvement led to the decision to invalidate the communication, stressing the necessity of prima facie evidence before taking consequential actions. Fair treatment and protection of individuals&#039; rights were emphasized in the judgment.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334662</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>