<?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 (10) TMI 227 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368261</link>
    <description>The court declined to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in a case challenging a Customs Act order for confiscation of mis-declared goods. Despite contradictory test reports, the court emphasized that such issues should be addressed before the Appellate Authority under the Act. As an effective alternative remedy existed, the court dismissed the petition without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2018 07:38:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=537094" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 227 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368261</link>
      <description>The court declined to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in a case challenging a Customs Act order for confiscation of mis-declared goods. Despite contradictory test reports, the court emphasized that such issues should be addressed before the Appellate Authority under the Act. As an effective alternative remedy existed, the court dismissed the petition without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368261</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>