<?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 (10) TMI 2615 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190362</link>
    <description>Imported capital goods supplied to a non-mega power project under advance authorisation were not treated as deemed exports because the Foreign Trade Policy limited that benefit to specified supplies of goods manufactured in India. The policy definition of &quot;manufacture&quot; in paragraph 9.36 could not override the express requirement in paragraph 8.2 that the supplied goods be manufactured in India. A DGFT circular clarified that imported boilers, turbines or generators supplied as such do not qualify for deemed export benefits. The article also notes that the project was an immovable power plant and that there was no estoppel against statute, so the export obligation discharge certificate and claimed benefit were ed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:46:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=458468" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 2615 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190362</link>
      <description>Imported capital goods supplied to a non-mega power project under advance authorisation were not treated as deemed exports because the Foreign Trade Policy limited that benefit to specified supplies of goods manufactured in India. The policy definition of &quot;manufacture&quot; in paragraph 9.36 could not override the express requirement in paragraph 8.2 that the supplied goods be manufactured in India. A DGFT circular clarified that imported boilers, turbines or generators supplied as such do not qualify for deemed export benefits. The article also notes that the project was an immovable power plant and that there was no estoppel against statute, so the export obligation discharge certificate and claimed benefit were ed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=190362</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>