<?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>2022 (8) TMI 340 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426101</link>
    <description>The court ordered the petitioner to provide a bank guarantee for 50% of the customs duty and directed the release of the gold bangles within two weeks upon receipt of the guarantee. Adjudication proceedings were to be finalized within three months. Emphasizing that gold is a restricted, not prohibited item, the court highlighted the option for redemption upon duty payment. The petition was disposed of without costs, and related miscellaneous petitions were closed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 07 Aug 2022 21:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=687379" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (8) TMI 340 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426101</link>
      <description>The court ordered the petitioner to provide a bank guarantee for 50% of the customs duty and directed the release of the gold bangles within two weeks upon receipt of the guarantee. Adjudication proceedings were to be finalized within three months. Emphasizing that gold is a restricted, not prohibited item, the court highlighted the option for redemption upon duty payment. The petition was disposed of without costs, and related miscellaneous petitions were closed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426101</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>