<?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 1437 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359326</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petitioner&#039;s claim of jurisdictional error in a case involving a show cause notice issued under the Customs Act, 1962. The court held that the question of the notice being issued to the correct person is a factual matter for the issuing authority to decide. As the petitioner did not challenge the authority&#039;s power to issue the notice, the jurisdictional issues raised were deemed unfounded. The court emphasized that matters regarding who should receive the notice and investigation into the alleged offense are within the authority&#039;s discretion. The petition was dismissed without ruling on the merits, leaving it to the second respondent to assess the petitioner&#039;s response to the notice.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2018 11:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518252" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1437 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359326</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petitioner&#039;s claim of jurisdictional error in a case involving a show cause notice issued under the Customs Act, 1962. The court held that the question of the notice being issued to the correct person is a factual matter for the issuing authority to decide. As the petitioner did not challenge the authority&#039;s power to issue the notice, the jurisdictional issues raised were deemed unfounded. The court emphasized that matters regarding who should receive the notice and investigation into the alleged offense are within the authority&#039;s discretion. The petition was dismissed without ruling on the merits, leaving it to the second respondent to assess the petitioner&#039;s response to the notice.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359326</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>