<?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>1987 (4) TMI 249 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73827</link>
    <description>Paragraph 204(1) of the ITC Policy for 1985-88 was read as permitting import of raw materials, components, spares and packing material linked to select products exported or manufactured by the licence-holder in either the export factory or another factory of the same name. The expression &quot;or&quot; was treated as disjunctive, so the policy did not require the imported goods to be tied only to the export product. Departmental reliance on paragraph 188 did not override the plain wording of paragraph 204(1), and the Chief Controller&#039;s clarification supported that reading. On that construction, the umbrella fittings and components fell within the REP licence and confiscation was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 11:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=112106" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (4) TMI 249 - CEGAT, MADRAS</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73827</link>
      <description>Paragraph 204(1) of the ITC Policy for 1985-88 was read as permitting import of raw materials, components, spares and packing material linked to select products exported or manufactured by the licence-holder in either the export factory or another factory of the same name. The expression &quot;or&quot; was treated as disjunctive, so the policy did not require the imported goods to be tied only to the export product. Departmental reliance on paragraph 188 did not override the plain wording of paragraph 204(1), and the Chief Controller&#039;s clarification supported that reading. On that construction, the umbrella fittings and components fell within the REP licence and confiscation was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Apr 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73827</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>