<?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>2026 (6) TMI 1110 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793729</link>
    <description>Illegal import of municipal solid waste was held to require return to the State or country of export, not diversion to Dubai or disposal within India. The court read the re-export requirement in Rule 15(2) of the 2016 waste-management rules consistently with the Basel Convention, and rejected reliance on the 10.01.2023 office memorandum for prohibited waste streams. The confiscation, penalty and re-export directions were upheld because the consignments were found to contain municipal solid waste, the importers accepted the findings, and no jurisdictional or procedural defect was shown. Detention and demurrage waiver was refused in principle, leaving the importers liable for the agreed and consequential charges.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2026 17:50:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=908214" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 1110 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793729</link>
      <description>Illegal import of municipal solid waste was held to require return to the State or country of export, not diversion to Dubai or disposal within India. The court read the re-export requirement in Rule 15(2) of the 2016 waste-management rules consistently with the Basel Convention, and rejected reliance on the 10.01.2023 office memorandum for prohibited waste streams. The confiscation, penalty and re-export directions were upheld because the consignments were found to contain municipal solid waste, the importers accepted the findings, and no jurisdictional or procedural defect was shown. Detention and demurrage waiver was refused in principle, leaving the importers liable for the agreed and consequential charges.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793729</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>