<?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>2023 (1) TMI 582 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432835</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petitions challenging an order under Section 114 (iii) of the Customs Act, 1962, citing the availability of an alternative remedy under Section 128 of the Act. Emphasizing the principle that parties must utilize statutory appeal remedies when provided by law, the court referred to relevant case law. As a result, the court declined to entertain the petitions and advised the petitioners to pursue the statutory appeal under the Customs Act, 1962, leading to the dismissal of the petitions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Jan 2023 12:06:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=701743" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (1) TMI 582 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432835</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petitions challenging an order under Section 114 (iii) of the Customs Act, 1962, citing the availability of an alternative remedy under Section 128 of the Act. Emphasizing the principle that parties must utilize statutory appeal remedies when provided by law, the court referred to relevant case law. As a result, the court declined to entertain the petitions and advised the petitioners to pursue the statutory appeal under the Customs Act, 1962, leading to the dismissal of the petitions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432835</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>