<?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 (7) TMI 126 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43313</link>
    <description>Release of confiscated goods was to follow the earlier release direction on deposit of the amounts fixed by the Assistant Collector, but that entitlement was made conditional on the Union obtaining a stay in its appeal within one month. If no stay order was obtained within that period, the petitioner was entitled to release of the goods. If a stay was obtained in time, the parties&#039; rights would be governed by that stay order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:54:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=81842" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (7) TMI 126 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43313</link>
      <description>Release of confiscated goods was to follow the earlier release direction on deposit of the amounts fixed by the Assistant Collector, but that entitlement was made conditional on the Union obtaining a stay in its appeal within one month. If no stay order was obtained within that period, the petitioner was entitled to release of the goods. If a stay was obtained in time, the parties&#039; rights would be governed by that stay order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43313</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>