<?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 (10) TMI 78 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44047</link>
    <description>Warehousing charges under the Customs Act could not be enforced where the importer had sought treatment of the goods under the special pending-clearance storage mechanism and that request had not been decided. The Court held that liability for warehouse rent or charges could not be determined without first deciding whether the goods fell under the special provision and whether the statutory conditions for ordinary warehousing were satisfied. As the relevant factual and legal questions had not been properly examined, the demand was set aside on the existing record and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration by the customs authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Jun 2010 17:04:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82576" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1994 (10) TMI 78 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44047</link>
      <description>Warehousing charges under the Customs Act could not be enforced where the importer had sought treatment of the goods under the special pending-clearance storage mechanism and that request had not been decided. The Court held that liability for warehouse rent or charges could not be determined without first deciding whether the goods fell under the special provision and whether the statutory conditions for ordinary warehousing were satisfied. As the relevant factual and legal questions had not been properly examined, the demand was set aside on the existing record and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration by the customs authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 1994 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44047</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>