https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170720 The Calcutta HC held that the DGFT could interpret the Foreign Trade Policy and resolve doubts, but could not amend the policy or add a restriction not found in its text. It further held that cement and steel supplied for mega power projects qualified for deemed export benefits under the Foreign Trade Policy 2009-14 before the June 2012 amendment, because the exclusion was inserted only prospectively and could not be applied retrospectively. The Court also found the denial orders unsustainable because they disclosed no reasons or basis. The denial of deemed export benefit was therefore set aside, and no refund of Terminal Excise Duty benefit was payable on the disputed supplies. en-us Wed, 30 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Jun 2015 15:18:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170720 The Calcutta HC held that the DGFT could interpret the Foreign Trade Policy and resolve doubts, but could not amend the policy or add a restriction not found in its text. It further held that cement and steel supplied for mega power projects qualified for deemed export benefits under the Foreign Trade Policy 2009-14 before the June 2012 amendment, because the exclusion was inserted only prospectively and could not be applied retrospectively. The Court also found the denial orders unsustainable because they disclosed no reasons or basis. The denial of deemed export benefit was therefore set aside, and no refund of Terminal Excise Duty benefit was payable on the disputed supplies. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 30 Apr 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170720