https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345999 An EOU manufacturing goods in India was held entitled to CST reimbursement under paragraph 6.11(c)(i) of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2009-2014 even where raw materials were purchased from another EOU/SEZ unit, because the clause does not limit reimbursement to DTA purchases. A subordinate circular could not add a restriction absent from the policy, as the policy has statutory force under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, so the circular was ineffective to the extent it denied the benefit for purchases from EOU/SEZ/STP/EHTP/BTP units. The Handbook of Procedures also required the designated STPI officer to receive, process and disburse the claim. en-us Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Apr 2018 16:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345999 An EOU manufacturing goods in India was held entitled to CST reimbursement under paragraph 6.11(c)(i) of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2009-2014 even where raw materials were purchased from another EOU/SEZ unit, because the clause does not limit reimbursement to DTA purchases. A subordinate circular could not add a restriction absent from the policy, as the policy has statutory force under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, so the circular was ineffective to the extent it denied the benefit for purchases from EOU/SEZ/STP/EHTP/BTP units. The Handbook of Procedures also required the designated STPI officer to receive, process and disburse the claim. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 18 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345999