https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192121 Mere non-use or temporary retention of iron and steel obtained under a permit did not, by itself, amount to a breach of clause 7 of the Iron and Steel (Control) Order, 1956, because the prohibition on "use" was read in context and did not create a time-limit for actual consumption or bar storage pending construction. The application for the permit could be used to construe the permit condition as to purpose, but the materials on record only showed intended use for a temple, and in one case a temple and dharamshala, without proving any locality-specific restriction. On that basis, no contravention was established and the acquittal was upheld. en-us Wed, 24 Feb 1965 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 15 May 2017 10:24:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192121 Mere non-use or temporary retention of iron and steel obtained under a permit did not, by itself, amount to a breach of clause 7 of the Iron and Steel (Control) Order, 1956, because the prohibition on "use" was read in context and did not create a time-limit for actual consumption or bar storage pending construction. The application for the permit could be used to construe the permit condition as to purpose, but the materials on record only showed intended use for a temple, and in one case a temple and dharamshala, without proving any locality-specific restriction. On that basis, no contravention was established and the acquittal was upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 24 Feb 1965 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192121