<?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>2024 (5) TMI 82 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752029</link>
    <description>The Madras HC ruled on the validity of safeguard duty levied on solar cell imports during an injunction period. The court held that while the notification imposing safeguard duty was issued on 30.7.2018 during an active injunction from Orissa HC, it became operative from 10.9.2018 when the SC stayed the injunction. The court distinguished between the notification&#039;s validity and its operability, finding the notification legally sound as subordinate legislation but inoperative during the injunction period. However, a specific assessment dated 2.8.2018 was quashed as it occurred during the prohibited period before the SC&#039;s stay order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 May 2024 07:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=751691" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 82 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752029</link>
      <description>The Madras HC ruled on the validity of safeguard duty levied on solar cell imports during an injunction period. The court held that while the notification imposing safeguard duty was issued on 30.7.2018 during an active injunction from Orissa HC, it became operative from 10.9.2018 when the SC stayed the injunction. The court distinguished between the notification&#039;s validity and its operability, finding the notification legally sound as subordinate legislation but inoperative during the injunction period. However, a specific assessment dated 2.8.2018 was quashed as it occurred during the prohibited period before the SC&#039;s stay order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752029</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>