<?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>1994 (3) TMI 100 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43784</link>
    <description>A customs notification published in the Government Gazette was treated as effective from the date of publication and as notice to the public. The Court relied on the legal presumption attaching to official Gazette publications to reject the argument that importers could avoid the notification for want of actual notice. Because the notification had been published before the relevant bill of entry was filed, it operated in law from that date and bound the importers.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Jun 2010 10:46:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82313" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (3) TMI 100 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43784</link>
      <description>A customs notification published in the Government Gazette was treated as effective from the date of publication and as notice to the public. The Court relied on the legal presumption attaching to official Gazette publications to reject the argument that importers could avoid the notification for want of actual notice. Because the notification had been published before the relevant bill of entry was filed, it operated in law from that date and bound the importers.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Mar 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43784</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>