<?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 (5) TMI 1301 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189077</link>
    <description>The writ petition was withdrawn at the petitioner&#039;s request, and the court permitted a fresh petition on the same cause of action. Counsel for the respondents stated that the petitioner had not honoured earlier undertakings, but the court did not adjudicate that dispute. The Mumbai Port Trust further stated that the detained goods, whether de-stuffed or still in containers, would not be put to auction for one week.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2016 15:43:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453054" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 1301 - PUNJAB &amp; HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189077</link>
      <description>The writ petition was withdrawn at the petitioner&#039;s request, and the court permitted a fresh petition on the same cause of action. Counsel for the respondents stated that the petitioner had not honoured earlier undertakings, but the court did not adjudicate that dispute. The Mumbai Port Trust further stated that the detained goods, whether de-stuffed or still in containers, would not be put to auction for one week.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189077</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>