<?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 (6) TMI 433 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772320</link>
    <description>The SC examined a case involving customs proceedings and locus standi. The Court held that a complainant who is not a party to original proceedings lacks standing to appeal before CESTAT. The petitioner&#039;s complaint did not specify relevant Customs Act provisions, and the order did not adversely affect their legal rights. The Court dismissed the writ petition, suggesting alternative legal remedies like criminal complaint or civil suit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jun 2025 08:33:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=827191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 433 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772320</link>
      <description>The SC examined a case involving customs proceedings and locus standi. The Court held that a complainant who is not a party to original proceedings lacks standing to appeal before CESTAT. The petitioner&#039;s complaint did not specify relevant Customs Act provisions, and the order did not adversely affect their legal rights. The Court dismissed the writ petition, suggesting alternative legal remedies like criminal complaint or civil suit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772320</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>