<?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 (7) TMI 1556 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775488</link>
    <description>The HC quashed the impugned order imposing recovery of Duty Drawback and penalty under the Customs Act, 1962, on grounds of violation of natural justice. Since the petitioner paid the amounts under protest and submitted documents showing fulfillment of export obligations, the court held they must be given an opportunity for a personal hearing to contest liability. The matter was remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration on merits, ensuring adherence to natural justice principles. The court did not rule on the substantive merits of the petitioner&#039;s claims. The petition was disposed by way of remand to prevent irreparable loss to the petitioner without causing revenue loss to the respondent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Jul 2025 08:39:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=838814" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 1556 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775488</link>
      <description>The HC quashed the impugned order imposing recovery of Duty Drawback and penalty under the Customs Act, 1962, on grounds of violation of natural justice. Since the petitioner paid the amounts under protest and submitted documents showing fulfillment of export obligations, the court held they must be given an opportunity for a personal hearing to contest liability. The matter was remanded to the respondent for fresh consideration on merits, ensuring adherence to natural justice principles. The court did not rule on the substantive merits of the petitioner&#039;s claims. The petition was disposed by way of remand to prevent irreparable loss to the petitioner without causing revenue loss to the respondent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775488</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>