<?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>2018 (1) TMI 29 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353293</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed a review petition concerning the classification of re-exported goods as &#039;prohibited goods&#039; under the Customs Act. The appellant&#039;s goods faced confiscation due to non-compliance with labelling requirements and refusal of NOC by FSSAI. Despite arguing the labelling issue was curable, the appellant accepted the goods as &#039;prohibited&#039; and sought re-export permission. The Court emphasized that goods contrary to legal prohibitions could be confiscated. The appellant&#039;s request for re-export after acknowledging the goods as &#039;prohibited&#039; was dismissed, leading to the rejection of the appeal and pending applications.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2018 06:01:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501900" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 29 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353293</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed a review petition concerning the classification of re-exported goods as &#039;prohibited goods&#039; under the Customs Act. The appellant&#039;s goods faced confiscation due to non-compliance with labelling requirements and refusal of NOC by FSSAI. Despite arguing the labelling issue was curable, the appellant accepted the goods as &#039;prohibited&#039; and sought re-export permission. The Court emphasized that goods contrary to legal prohibitions could be confiscated. The appellant&#039;s request for re-export after acknowledging the goods as &#039;prohibited&#039; was dismissed, leading to the rejection of the appeal and pending applications.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 May 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353293</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>