<?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 (9) TMI 1169 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386401</link>
    <description>Provisional release of export goods suspected of misdeclaration or overvaluation may be made subject to a bond and appropriate security to protect revenue interests. The customs circulars allow release on execution of a bond for the value of the goods together with security covering redemption fine and penalty, and the court treated a bank guarantee as a reasonable safeguard on the facts. The challenge to the additional bank guarantee condition therefore failed, while the merits of the alleged misclassification, overvaluation, and higher refund claim were left for adjudication. The request to substitute immovable property security was left open for consideration by the authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Jan 2020 11:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=588949" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 1169 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386401</link>
      <description>Provisional release of export goods suspected of misdeclaration or overvaluation may be made subject to a bond and appropriate security to protect revenue interests. The customs circulars allow release on execution of a bond for the value of the goods together with security covering redemption fine and penalty, and the court treated a bank guarantee as a reasonable safeguard on the facts. The challenge to the additional bank guarantee condition therefore failed, while the merits of the alleged misclassification, overvaluation, and higher refund claim were left for adjudication. The request to substitute immovable property security was left open for consideration by the authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386401</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>