<?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>2025 (2) TMI 220 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765674</link>
    <description>A bail condition requiring repeated surrender of a passport after foreign travel was treated as indirect impounding and held unsustainable because the Passports Act, 1967 provides the governing mechanism for impounding or retention of passports. The Court considered that the passport was not incriminating, the applicant had complied with earlier travel permissions, had not misused liberty, and needed short-notice overseas travel for business. The flight-risk objection was rejected. The restrictive condition was deleted, the passport ordered to be returned, and the applicant was required only to furnish advance travel details for future foreign trips.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Feb 2025 08:38:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=795914" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (2) TMI 220 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765674</link>
      <description>A bail condition requiring repeated surrender of a passport after foreign travel was treated as indirect impounding and held unsustainable because the Passports Act, 1967 provides the governing mechanism for impounding or retention of passports. The Court considered that the passport was not incriminating, the applicant had complied with earlier travel permissions, had not misused liberty, and needed short-notice overseas travel for business. The flight-risk objection was rejected. The restrictive condition was deleted, the passport ordered to be returned, and the applicant was required only to furnish advance travel details for future foreign trips.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765674</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>