<?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>2020 (2) TMI 409 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391965</link>
    <description>The Court directed the Petitioner to address the refund and penalty issues through the pending Appeal, emphasizing the importance of utilizing the Appeal process to resolve disputes related to deposit ownership and duty evasion involvement. The Court refrained from delving into the ownership dispute in the current Petition, highlighting the need to pursue legal remedies through the proper channels.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2020 07:36:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=603426" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 409 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391965</link>
      <description>The Court directed the Petitioner to address the refund and penalty issues through the pending Appeal, emphasizing the importance of utilizing the Appeal process to resolve disputes related to deposit ownership and duty evasion involvement. The Court refrained from delving into the ownership dispute in the current Petition, highlighting the need to pursue legal remedies through the proper channels.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391965</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>