<?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>2019 (7) TMI 262 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382566</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petition challenging a notice for outstanding dues and an order deregistering a contract, emphasizing the importance of valid service of notice as required by Section 153 of the Customs Act. The respondent argued that service was valid at the registered address, accusing the petitioner of not updating their address. The court held the petitioner responsible for failing to notify authorities of address changes, supported by legal precedents presuming delivery through registered post. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, finding no grounds to interfere with the order in original or related communication under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=578219" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 262 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382566</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petition challenging a notice for outstanding dues and an order deregistering a contract, emphasizing the importance of valid service of notice as required by Section 153 of the Customs Act. The respondent argued that service was valid at the registered address, accusing the petitioner of not updating their address. The court held the petitioner responsible for failing to notify authorities of address changes, supported by legal precedents presuming delivery through registered post. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition, finding no grounds to interfere with the order in original or related communication under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382566</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>