<?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 (4) TMI 238 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358127</link>
    <description>The DGFT notification requiring laboratory testing was held applicable to the imported consignment because a notification operates from its notified date, not from the date of uploading in the electronic gazette. Balancing the importer&#039;s concern over the burden of testing multiple varieties of children&#039;s toys against the need for public safety and revenue protection, the court directed only representative sampling: one piece per variety, capped at 15% of each variety, with the customs house agent allowed to remain present. The samples were to be sent to the approved laboratory, and the respondents were required to act on the test report and decide release of the goods in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Jan 2019 17:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=516027" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 238 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358127</link>
      <description>The DGFT notification requiring laboratory testing was held applicable to the imported consignment because a notification operates from its notified date, not from the date of uploading in the electronic gazette. Balancing the importer&#039;s concern over the burden of testing multiple varieties of children&#039;s toys against the need for public safety and revenue protection, the court directed only representative sampling: one piece per variety, capped at 15% of each variety, with the customs house agent allowed to remain present. The samples were to be sent to the approved laboratory, and the respondents were required to act on the test report and decide release of the goods in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358127</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>