<?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 (10) TMI 139 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413087</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the review petition, upholding the original order allowing the petitioner to re-export Gold Dore Bars. It found no grounds for review, noting the incomplete import status and DGFT&#039;s clarification supporting re-export. The court emphasized adherence to the DGFT&#039;s interpretation and legal precedents, affirming the petitioner&#039;s right to re-export.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 Oct 2021 09:01:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=657563" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (10) TMI 139 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413087</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the review petition, upholding the original order allowing the petitioner to re-export Gold Dore Bars. It found no grounds for review, noting the incomplete import status and DGFT&#039;s clarification supporting re-export. The court emphasized adherence to the DGFT&#039;s interpretation and legal precedents, affirming the petitioner&#039;s right to re-export.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=413087</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>