https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270306 Import of betel nut splits under transferable DFIA licences was not permissible on these facts because the operative public notice in force required areca nut to be imported only by an actual user or to be specifically mentioned in the relevant SION. The importer was not an actual user, and the SION entries for the exported leather products did not specifically refer to areca nut, so clearance was denied. Later Notification No. 31(RE-2013)/2009-14 and Public Notices Nos. 32 and 35 of 2013 were treated as prospective and did not retrospectively bar prior transferable DFIAs; however, they did not displace the earlier 15.05.2012 public notice governing the disputed imports. The challenge to the adverse order therefore failed. en-us Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 24 Feb 2016 14:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270306 Import of betel nut splits under transferable DFIA licences was not permissible on these facts because the operative public notice in force required areca nut to be imported only by an actual user or to be specifically mentioned in the relevant SION. The importer was not an actual user, and the SION entries for the exported leather products did not specifically refer to areca nut, so clearance was denied. Later Notification No. 31(RE-2013)/2009-14 and Public Notices Nos. 32 and 35 of 2013 were treated as prospective and did not retrospectively bar prior transferable DFIAs; however, they did not displace the earlier 15.05.2012 public notice governing the disputed imports. The challenge to the adverse order therefore failed. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 16 Sep 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270306