<?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>1986 (11) TMI 48 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41839</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the appeal, overturning the summary dismissal of the Writ Petition. The Court granted interim relief to the appellants, requiring them to provide a bank guarantee and a personal bond to secure the duty difference. The relief was subject to conditions, including installing the machines in their factory and refraining from disposing of them. The respondents were allowed to test the machines&#039; operational speed, with provisions for adjusting the interim order based on the test results. The Court emphasized the need for a proper interpretation of the import policy entry and the lack of substantial evidence supporting the respondents&#039; arguments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Jun 2010 13:42:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80368" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (11) TMI 48 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41839</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the appeal, overturning the summary dismissal of the Writ Petition. The Court granted interim relief to the appellants, requiring them to provide a bank guarantee and a personal bond to secure the duty difference. The relief was subject to conditions, including installing the machines in their factory and refraining from disposing of them. The respondents were allowed to test the machines&#039; operational speed, with provisions for adjusting the interim order based on the test results. The Court emphasized the need for a proper interpretation of the import policy entry and the lack of substantial evidence supporting the respondents&#039; arguments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Nov 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41839</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>