<?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>2015 (1) TMI 493 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255294</link>
    <description>Export restrictions must be traceable to the notified Foreign Trade Policy or an existing law; an administrative circular cannot create a new embargo on goods not shown to be specifically restricted. The Delhi HC held that a blanket requirement of a no objection certificate for goods said to be in the nature of military stores was inconsistent with the Foreign Trade Policy and the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 because the items were not shown to fall within the restricted framework, including the SCOMET list. It also held that the Director General of Foreign Trade could not use a circular to enlarge or alter policy beyond the power to specify procedure or clarify the policy. The circular was quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2015 10:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373828" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 493 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255294</link>
      <description>Export restrictions must be traceable to the notified Foreign Trade Policy or an existing law; an administrative circular cannot create a new embargo on goods not shown to be specifically restricted. The Delhi HC held that a blanket requirement of a no objection certificate for goods said to be in the nature of military stores was inconsistent with the Foreign Trade Policy and the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992 because the items were not shown to fall within the restricted framework, including the SCOMET list. It also held that the Director General of Foreign Trade could not use a circular to enlarge or alter policy beyond the power to specify procedure or clarify the policy. The circular was quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255294</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>