https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126218 Notification No. 160/92-Cus. required the importer to possess a valid licence issued by the licensing authority on the date of import. Because the licences were issued only after the goods had already been imported, the condition precedent for the concessional rate was not met. The doctrine of relating back could not override the express wording of the notification or cure the absence of a valid licence at the time of import. The importers were therefore not entitled to the exemption benefit, and the appeals were rejected. en-us Fri, 22 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 03 Nov 2012 14:10:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126218 Notification No. 160/92-Cus. required the importer to possess a valid licence issued by the licensing authority on the date of import. Because the licences were issued only after the goods had already been imported, the condition precedent for the concessional rate was not met. The doctrine of relating back could not override the express wording of the notification or cure the absence of a valid licence at the time of import. The importers were therefore not entitled to the exemption benefit, and the appeals were rejected. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 22 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126218