<?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>2025 (5) TMI 425 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770153</link>
    <description>Pending MEIS applications were required to be processed, with scrips issued for the balance of claims already accepted in principle. The respondents stated that 70 applications had been allowed and that the remaining 39 pending applications would be processed forthwith and the scrips issued expeditiously. The two applications treated as time barred were not finally rejected; the petitioner was directed to produce supporting documents and appear before the authority, which was to examine the claims afresh and decide them after hearing the petitioner. The immediate operative effect was relief for the pending applications, while the disputed limitation issue was kept open for administrative determination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 May 2025 09:18:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=820043" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 425 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770153</link>
      <description>Pending MEIS applications were required to be processed, with scrips issued for the balance of claims already accepted in principle. The respondents stated that 70 applications had been allowed and that the remaining 39 pending applications would be processed forthwith and the scrips issued expeditiously. The two applications treated as time barred were not finally rejected; the petitioner was directed to produce supporting documents and appear before the authority, which was to examine the claims afresh and decide them after hearing the petitioner. The immediate operative effect was relief for the pending applications, while the disputed limitation issue was kept open for administrative determination.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770153</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>