<?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 (5) TMI 1237 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328256</link>
    <description>The court held that Customs Notification No. 91/2009 was ultra vires the relevant acts and rules, allowing for the transfer of goods imported under the SFIS. It deemed the letter challenging the transfer of vessels as contrary to the law, emphasizing the DGFT&#039;s authority in interpreting the FTP. The court affirmed the transferability of goods under SFIS after a specified period without RA permission. It resolved the DoR-DGFT conflict by upholding the DGFT&#039;s interpretation as final and binding. The petitioner was granted relief, enabling the transfer/sale of vessels without DoR objections due to the vessels&#039; age.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2016 12:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=430080" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 1237 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328256</link>
      <description>The court held that Customs Notification No. 91/2009 was ultra vires the relevant acts and rules, allowing for the transfer of goods imported under the SFIS. It deemed the letter challenging the transfer of vessels as contrary to the law, emphasizing the DGFT&#039;s authority in interpreting the FTP. The court affirmed the transferability of goods under SFIS after a specified period without RA permission. It resolved the DoR-DGFT conflict by upholding the DGFT&#039;s interpretation as final and binding. The petitioner was granted relief, enabling the transfer/sale of vessels without DoR objections due to the vessels&#039; age.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328256</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>