<?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>1989 (2) TMI 119 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42443</link>
    <description>A salvaged vessel that had sunk in port and later vested in the Government was treated as wreck and scrap, so customs duty applied on the basis that such goods are deemed to be imported into India; the ocean-going vessel exemption did not protect a vessel subsequently broken up. The canalising agency&#039;s service charges were upheld because liability flowed from the import and disposal scheme through the authorised agency, not from proof of direct services to the petitioners. Additional duty under the Customs Tariff Act was also leviable because the true character of the imported article was scrap. Writ relief was declined where the petitioners had accepted the tender conditions and raised no timely objection.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:43:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80972" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (2) TMI 119 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42443</link>
      <description>A salvaged vessel that had sunk in port and later vested in the Government was treated as wreck and scrap, so customs duty applied on the basis that such goods are deemed to be imported into India; the ocean-going vessel exemption did not protect a vessel subsequently broken up. The canalising agency&#039;s service charges were upheld because liability flowed from the import and disposal scheme through the authorised agency, not from proof of direct services to the petitioners. Additional duty under the Customs Tariff Act was also leviable because the true character of the imported article was scrap. Writ relief was declined where the petitioners had accepted the tender conditions and raised no timely objection.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42443</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>