<?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 (12) TMI 1106 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336461</link>
    <description>The appeal was filed to challenge the order of a single Judge directing the Department to test detained imported goods. The Court addressed disputes over expressions used in the order, clarified terms, and upheld the need for compliance with Customs Act provisions. Ultimately, the Court ordered the release of the goods to the importer upon meeting specified conditions, including providing a bank guarantee and participating in the ongoing enquiry, with no costs awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2017 13:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=452529" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1106 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336461</link>
      <description>The appeal was filed to challenge the order of a single Judge directing the Department to test detained imported goods. The Court addressed disputes over expressions used in the order, clarified terms, and upheld the need for compliance with Customs Act provisions. Ultimately, the Court ordered the release of the goods to the importer upon meeting specified conditions, including providing a bank guarantee and participating in the ongoing enquiry, with no costs awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336461</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>