<?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 853 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355432</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, ruling that the petitioner was not entitled to interest on the delayed refund of the redemption fine and penalty under the Customs Act, 1962. The court held that the specific statutory provisions of Sections 27 and 27A did not apply to the nature of the refund sought by the petitioner. It was concluded that the petitioner could potentially seek interest under general law but not under the Customs Act&#039;s framework.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2018 16:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=508919" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 853 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355432</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, ruling that the petitioner was not entitled to interest on the delayed refund of the redemption fine and penalty under the Customs Act, 1962. The court held that the specific statutory provisions of Sections 27 and 27A did not apply to the nature of the refund sought by the petitioner. It was concluded that the petitioner could potentially seek interest under general law but not under the Customs Act&#039;s framework.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355432</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>