<?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>2017 (7) TMI 786 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345674</link>
    <description>Reimbursement of Central Sales Tax under the Foreign Trade Policy, 2009 was held to extend beyond purchases from Domestic Tariff Area units and to cover purchases from another Export Oriented Unit. The Court reasoned that Chapter 6 granted a substantive export incentive to Export Oriented Units, that goods manufactured by such units are goods manufactured in India for policy purposes, and that inter-unit supplies were not inherently excluded. It further held that a procedural appendix could prescribe implementation details but could not curtail or alter the entitlement created by the policy. The later 2015 amendment was treated as a course correction, and export incentive provisions were construed liberally to advance their object.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2018 17:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=482595" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (7) TMI 786 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345674</link>
      <description>Reimbursement of Central Sales Tax under the Foreign Trade Policy, 2009 was held to extend beyond purchases from Domestic Tariff Area units and to cover purchases from another Export Oriented Unit. The Court reasoned that Chapter 6 granted a substantive export incentive to Export Oriented Units, that goods manufactured by such units are goods manufactured in India for policy purposes, and that inter-unit supplies were not inherently excluded. It further held that a procedural appendix could prescribe implementation details but could not curtail or alter the entitlement created by the policy. The later 2015 amendment was treated as a course correction, and export incentive provisions were construed liberally to advance their object.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345674</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>