<?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 (2) TMI 753 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355332</link>
    <description>The Criminal Revision Case was allowed, setting aside the order of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. The petitioners were discharged from the case due to the absence of the firm as an accused party. The judgment underscored the importance of properly including the company or firm in cases involving liability of individuals in charge of its affairs, as per the provisions of the Customs Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Feb 2018 06:18:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=508754" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 753 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355332</link>
      <description>The Criminal Revision Case was allowed, setting aside the order of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. The petitioners were discharged from the case due to the absence of the firm as an accused party. The judgment underscored the importance of properly including the company or firm in cases involving liability of individuals in charge of its affairs, as per the provisions of the Customs Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355332</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>