<?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>2021 (4) TMI 312 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406196</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the writ petitions challenging the summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act, except for one petitioner on humanitarian grounds, directing fresh summons from Chennai. The court upheld the jurisdiction of the DRI in Kolkata and mandated videography during interrogation to ensure transparency and protect individual rights.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2024 15:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=641239" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (4) TMI 312 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406196</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the writ petitions challenging the summons under Section 108 of the Customs Act, except for one petitioner on humanitarian grounds, directing fresh summons from Chennai. The court upheld the jurisdiction of the DRI in Kolkata and mandated videography during interrogation to ensure transparency and protect individual rights.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=406196</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>