<?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 1502 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336857</link>
    <description>The court found the respondent&#039;s failure to implement the appellate order without obtaining a stay unjustifiable. It directed the release of detained gold for re-export, subject to compliance with conditions imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and providing an undertaking. The court mandated the disposition of the main revision petition within eight weeks if no stay was in place, emphasizing the importance of judicial discipline in adhering to appellate orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2017 14:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=453520" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1502 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336857</link>
      <description>The court found the respondent&#039;s failure to implement the appellate order without obtaining a stay unjustifiable. It directed the release of detained gold for re-export, subject to compliance with conditions imposed by the Commissioner (Appeals) and providing an undertaking. The court mandated the disposition of the main revision petition within eight weeks if no stay was in place, emphasizing the importance of judicial discipline in adhering to appellate orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>