<?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>2006 (3) TMI 152 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47643</link>
    <description>Interim protection was granted in an EPCG-related dispute where the petitioner had purchased machinery subject to an existing export obligation. The High Court found that no amount had yet become due and payable, and that restraining the authorities from taking possession would not prejudice the Government at that stage. It also accepted that the petitioner&#039;s undertaking to export the required quantity of yarn remained enforceable. The relief was conditioned on deposit of Rs. 25 lakhs, execution of a bond, and a restraint on alienation of the machinery, while the petitioner was allowed to continue manufacturing and export operations pending compliance with the export obligation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:47:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=86161" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 152 - HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47643</link>
      <description>Interim protection was granted in an EPCG-related dispute where the petitioner had purchased machinery subject to an existing export obligation. The High Court found that no amount had yet become due and payable, and that restraining the authorities from taking possession would not prejudice the Government at that stage. It also accepted that the petitioner&#039;s undertaking to export the required quantity of yarn remained enforceable. The relief was conditioned on deposit of Rs. 25 lakhs, execution of a bond, and a restraint on alienation of the machinery, while the petitioner was allowed to continue manufacturing and export operations pending compliance with the export obligation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47643</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>