<?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 (12) TMI 735 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371966</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the communication from the Dy. Commissioner of Customs as fulfilling the requirement of pre-notice consultation under Section 28 of the Customs Act. It clarified that the communication served as a valid consultation, allowing the petitioner to raise objections before the proper officer if recovery proceedings are initiated. The Court disposed of the petition, finding no further orders necessary based on the Department&#039;s clarification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Dec 2018 06:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=546917" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 735 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371966</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the communication from the Dy. Commissioner of Customs as fulfilling the requirement of pre-notice consultation under Section 28 of the Customs Act. It clarified that the communication served as a valid consultation, allowing the petitioner to raise objections before the proper officer if recovery proceedings are initiated. The Court disposed of the petition, finding no further orders necessary based on the Department&#039;s clarification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371966</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>