https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205735 The Court held that the prescribed customs duty rates for goods under Tariff Heading 2208.10 during financial years 1993-94 and 1994-95, as legislated by Parliament in the Finance Acts, were binding despite discrepancies with budget proposals. It dismissed the petitioner's claims regarding duty rates, emphasizing the supremacy of enacted law over budgetary proposals. Additionally, the Court clarified that it lacks the authority to direct the Central Government to issue notifications for customs duty exemptions unless specific grounds for challenging such power are present. The petition was dismissed, and parties were left to bear their own costs. en-us Fri, 02 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Dec 2015 18:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205735 The Court held that the prescribed customs duty rates for goods under Tariff Heading 2208.10 during financial years 1993-94 and 1994-95, as legislated by Parliament in the Finance Acts, were binding despite discrepancies with budget proposals. It dismissed the petitioner's claims regarding duty rates, emphasizing the supremacy of enacted law over budgetary proposals. Additionally, the Court clarified that it lacks the authority to direct the Central Government to issue notifications for customs duty exemptions unless specific grounds for challenging such power are present. The petition was dismissed, and parties were left to bear their own costs. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 02 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205735