<?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 (5) TMI 67 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359503</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the Settlement Commission&#039;s order on undervaluation of imported goods, and remanded the matter for reconsideration. The respondent was directed to review the petitioner&#039;s claim, provide a hearing opportunity, and issue new orders in compliance with the law. The decision left all issues open for further discussion, including penalty levy, with no costs imposed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 May 2018 06:26:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=518602" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (5) TMI 67 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359503</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the writ petition, quashed the Settlement Commission&#039;s order on undervaluation of imported goods, and remanded the matter for reconsideration. The respondent was directed to review the petitioner&#039;s claim, provide a hearing opportunity, and issue new orders in compliance with the law. The decision left all issues open for further discussion, including penalty levy, with no costs imposed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=359503</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>