<?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>1993 (7) TMI 204 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83444</link>
    <description>Customs authorities must confine import permissions to the express terms of the import licence; a raw material cannot be treated as covered merely because the end-product appears in the industrial registration certificate or import policy if it is not endorsed in the licence itself. The stated principle is that the licence controls the scope of permissible imports, so unendorsed coverage will not be read into it. At the same time, where the omission is technical and the end-product was reflected in the registration record, leniency may be justified in fixing redemption fine. The confiscation remained intact, but the fine could be reduced to reflect the technical nature of the lapse.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 15:31:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=120589" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (7) TMI 204 - CEGAT, BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83444</link>
      <description>Customs authorities must confine import permissions to the express terms of the import licence; a raw material cannot be treated as covered merely because the end-product appears in the industrial registration certificate or import policy if it is not endorsed in the licence itself. The stated principle is that the licence controls the scope of permissible imports, so unendorsed coverage will not be read into it. At the same time, where the omission is technical and the end-product was reflected in the registration record, leniency may be justified in fixing redemption fine. The confiscation remained intact, but the fine could be reduced to reflect the technical nature of the lapse.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=83444</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>