<?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 (7) TMI 2151 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291866</link>
    <description>The petitioner&#039;s grievance concerning the Bills of Entry was stated to have been redressed, and a speaking order had been passed on the relevant Bills of Entry. As the underlying relief sought had therefore been addressed, the claim was treated as infructuous and the writ petition was disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Nov 2020 09:15:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=628723" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 2151 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291866</link>
      <description>The petitioner&#039;s grievance concerning the Bills of Entry was stated to have been redressed, and a speaking order had been passed on the relevant Bills of Entry. As the underlying relief sought had therefore been addressed, the claim was treated as infructuous and the writ petition was disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291866</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>