<?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>1994 (11) TMI 447 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293662</link>
    <description>Section 11 of COFEPOSA was construed to permit a revocation request even before service of a detention order, because the words &quot;at any time&quot; include the post-order, pre-service stage; however, that limited right does not extend to obtaining an injunction stopping execution of the detention order while the revocation request is pending. Where the revocation plea relies on a recognised pre-execution exception, including alleged wrong purpose, the authority must examine the relevant material and record reasons in its file. On that basis, the refusal to revoke was quashed and the matter remitted for fresh consideration, without granting interim protection against execution.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2021 10:50:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=637175" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (11) TMI 447 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293662</link>
      <description>Section 11 of COFEPOSA was construed to permit a revocation request even before service of a detention order, because the words &quot;at any time&quot; include the post-order, pre-service stage; however, that limited right does not extend to obtaining an injunction stopping execution of the detention order while the revocation request is pending. Where the revocation plea relies on a recognised pre-execution exception, including alleged wrong purpose, the authority must examine the relevant material and record reasons in its file. On that basis, the refusal to revoke was quashed and the matter remitted for fresh consideration, without granting interim protection against execution.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293662</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>