<?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 (12) TMI 222 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73837</link>
    <description>Defective galvanised sheets, classified as banned iron and steel items under the import policy, could not be imported under REP licences merely because the licences allowed packing material or other export-linked goods. The policy required iron and steel imports to be prime quality unless expressly exempted, and the relevant provisions extended that requirement to REP imports. Appendix 17 did not specifically authorise defective sheets or other banned items, and no express policy permission was shown in the licences relied upon. The result was that the REP licences did not cover the import, and confiscation for lack of valid licence coverage was justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Jan 2012 11:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=112116" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1987 (12) TMI 222 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73837</link>
      <description>Defective galvanised sheets, classified as banned iron and steel items under the import policy, could not be imported under REP licences merely because the licences allowed packing material or other export-linked goods. The policy required iron and steel imports to be prime quality unless expressly exempted, and the relevant provisions extended that requirement to REP imports. Appendix 17 did not specifically authorise defective sheets or other banned items, and no express policy permission was shown in the licences relied upon. The result was that the REP licences did not cover the import, and confiscation for lack of valid licence coverage was justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Dec 1987 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=73837</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>