<?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>1988 (4) TMI 53 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42213</link>
    <description>The petition challenging Customs Authorities&#039; confiscation orders and fines for importing Partially Oriented Yarn (POY) was dismissed. The petitioner, a licensed manufacturer of polyester filament yarn, claimed entitlement to import POY as an actual user under the Import Policy. However, the Assistant Collector determined that the petitioner&#039;s industrial license did not permit importing intermediate products like POY. The penalty imposed was upheld as appropriate given market conditions. The court ruled against the petitioner, emphasizing their lack of entitlement to import POY and endorsing the penalty imposed by the Assistant Collector.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 18:05:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80742" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1988 (4) TMI 53 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42213</link>
      <description>The petition challenging Customs Authorities&#039; confiscation orders and fines for importing Partially Oriented Yarn (POY) was dismissed. The petitioner, a licensed manufacturer of polyester filament yarn, claimed entitlement to import POY as an actual user under the Import Policy. However, the Assistant Collector determined that the petitioner&#039;s industrial license did not permit importing intermediate products like POY. The penalty imposed was upheld as appropriate given market conditions. The court ruled against the petitioner, emphasizing their lack of entitlement to import POY and endorsing the penalty imposed by the Assistant Collector.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Apr 1988 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42213</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>