<?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>2016 (4) TMI 788 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326674</link>
    <description>Import of Ethephon required a registration certificate specifically permitting import under Section 9(4) of the Insecticides Act, 1968. Certificates issued only for indigenous manufacture did not satisfy that statutory condition, and prior clearance of similar consignments could not override the mandatory import requirement. On that basis, the petitioner could not rely on existing certificates to secure release of the consignment, and the request for clearance failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Nov 2016 16:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=424741" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 788 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326674</link>
      <description>Import of Ethephon required a registration certificate specifically permitting import under Section 9(4) of the Insecticides Act, 1968. Certificates issued only for indigenous manufacture did not satisfy that statutory condition, and prior clearance of similar consignments could not override the mandatory import requirement. On that basis, the petitioner could not rely on existing certificates to secure release of the consignment, and the request for clearance failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326674</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>