<?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>1992 (11) TMI 110 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43598</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to respond to the show cause notice. The petitioner was allowed to use the machinery during the proceedings with the condition that it is not shifted or alienated. The court emphasized that clearance under Section 47 does not prevent subsequent confiscation proceedings and highlighted the need for the petitioner to participate in the proceedings regarding the validity of machinery import under the Open General Licence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2020 13:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82127" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (11) TMI 110 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43598</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, directing the petitioner to respond to the show cause notice. The petitioner was allowed to use the machinery during the proceedings with the condition that it is not shifted or alienated. The court emphasized that clearance under Section 47 does not prevent subsequent confiscation proceedings and highlighted the need for the petitioner to participate in the proceedings regarding the validity of machinery import under the Open General Licence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Nov 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43598</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>