<?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>2017 (7) TMI 290 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345178</link>
    <description>The High Court of Bombay dismissed the Writ Petition seeking to quash Attachment Panchnamas for excise duty recovery. Despite interim relief, the Court found the petitioner&#039;s actions stalled the recovery process by misusing legal procedures and failing to disclose the disposal of B.I.F.R. proceedings. As the demand order remained valid and the petitioner committed to payment, the attachment was upheld as legal. The Court vacated the interim relief, emphasizing the need for transparency and adherence to legal processes. The respondent was tasked with verifying if the petitioner had fulfilled the payment undertaking.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2017 07:15:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=480701" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 290 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345178</link>
      <description>The High Court of Bombay dismissed the Writ Petition seeking to quash Attachment Panchnamas for excise duty recovery. Despite interim relief, the Court found the petitioner&#039;s actions stalled the recovery process by misusing legal procedures and failing to disclose the disposal of B.I.F.R. proceedings. As the demand order remained valid and the petitioner committed to payment, the attachment was upheld as legal. The Court vacated the interim relief, emphasizing the need for transparency and adherence to legal processes. The respondent was tasked with verifying if the petitioner had fulfilled the payment undertaking.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345178</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>