<?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>1980 (8) TMI 86 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40895</link>
    <description>The court upheld the government&#039;s position, ruling that import under the Customs Act occurs upon bill presentation. The court clarified that the duty exemption notification did not levy duty but exempted up to 87.5%, with any excess amount subject to duty. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition, denying the petitioner&#039;s refund claim based on conflicting customs duty notifications.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Jul 2017 15:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=79426" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (8) TMI 86 - HIGH COURT OF MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40895</link>
      <description>The court upheld the government&#039;s position, ruling that import under the Customs Act occurs upon bill presentation. The court clarified that the duty exemption notification did not levy duty but exempted up to 87.5%, with any excess amount subject to duty. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition, denying the petitioner&#039;s refund claim based on conflicting customs duty notifications.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Aug 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=40895</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>