<?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>1985 (7) TMI 107 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42436</link>
    <description>The High Court upheld the trial judge&#039;s decision in a Customs Act case, focusing on the interpretation of &quot;silver bullion.&quot; Emphasizing common commercial understanding, the court ruled that bullion refers to uncoined precious metal bars or ingots, excluding manufactured articles. Scrutinizing relevant Customs Act sections, the court highlighted penalties for violations and the importance of interpreting legal terms based on common understanding. Witness testimonies and legislative intent analysis were considered, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case, finding no significant public interest question for review.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:26:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80965" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (7) TMI 107 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42436</link>
      <description>The High Court upheld the trial judge&#039;s decision in a Customs Act case, focusing on the interpretation of &quot;silver bullion.&quot; Emphasizing common commercial understanding, the court ruled that bullion refers to uncoined precious metal bars or ingots, excluding manufactured articles. Scrutinizing relevant Customs Act sections, the court highlighted penalties for violations and the importance of interpreting legal terms based on common understanding. Witness testimonies and legislative intent analysis were considered, leading to the dismissal of the appeal. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case, finding no significant public interest question for review.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42436</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>