<?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>1982 (11) TMI 170 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166687</link>
    <description>The Bombay High Court held that eligibility for an Export House Certificate had to be tested strictly against the criteria in the import policy: exports in each base year and the prescribed average f.o.b. value. A year-on-year decline during the base period was not a disqualifying factor because the policy did not require continuous growth. The Court also ruled that the authority could not add a further condition by executive interpretation, as administrative action must remain within the four corners of the published scheme. On that basis, the refusal was set aside and the additional licence application was directed to be considered on merits within the stipulated time.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Nov 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Dec 2014 11:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=367731" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (11) TMI 170 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166687</link>
      <description>The Bombay High Court held that eligibility for an Export House Certificate had to be tested strictly against the criteria in the import policy: exports in each base year and the prescribed average f.o.b. value. A year-on-year decline during the base period was not a disqualifying factor because the policy did not require continuous growth. The Court also ruled that the authority could not add a further condition by executive interpretation, as administrative action must remain within the four corners of the published scheme. On that basis, the refusal was set aside and the additional licence application was directed to be considered on merits within the stipulated time.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Nov 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=166687</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>