<?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>2005 (7) TMI 115 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47854</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the appeals, affirming the single judge&#039;s order, and directed the completion of adjudication proceedings. The appellant&#039;s request to draw samples was denied, but cross-examination of NML experts was permitted. The Customs Officer&#039;s provisional release of goods was deemed fair. The court emphasized the necessity of engaging in adjudication rather than premature writ petitions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2024 11:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=86370" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 115 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47854</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the appeals, affirming the single judge&#039;s order, and directed the completion of adjudication proceedings. The appellant&#039;s request to draw samples was denied, but cross-examination of NML experts was permitted. The Customs Officer&#039;s provisional release of goods was deemed fair. The court emphasized the necessity of engaging in adjudication rather than premature writ petitions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47854</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>