<?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 (3) TMI 135 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766750</link>
    <description>A customs recovery demand for duty drawback and interest was treated as unsustainable where the claim was not included in the approved resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Applying the settled principle that approval of a resolution plan extinguishes claims not forming part of that plan, the court held that the post-resolution demand could not be pursued against the corporate debtor. It also held that the writ petition remained maintainable despite the statutory appeal under the Customs Act because the dispute was governed by the insolvency framework and the impugned demand was outside the approved plan.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2025 14:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=803486" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (3) TMI 135 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766750</link>
      <description>A customs recovery demand for duty drawback and interest was treated as unsustainable where the claim was not included in the approved resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Applying the settled principle that approval of a resolution plan extinguishes claims not forming part of that plan, the court held that the post-resolution demand could not be pursued against the corporate debtor. It also held that the writ petition remained maintainable despite the statutory appeal under the Customs Act because the dispute was governed by the insolvency framework and the impugned demand was outside the approved plan.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766750</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>