<?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 (3) TMI 1588 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197157</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petition, ruling that there is no legal provision for the presence of counsel during the recording of statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act. The court also rejected the request for prior notice before arrest, stating that it would impede the statutory powers of customs officers. The petition was deemed without merit and was consequently dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Dec 2017 18:04:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501540" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (3) TMI 1588 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197157</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petition, ruling that there is no legal provision for the presence of counsel during the recording of statements under Section 108 of the Customs Act. The court also rejected the request for prior notice before arrest, stating that it would impede the statutory powers of customs officers. The petition was deemed without merit and was consequently dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=197157</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>