<?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>2019 (1) TMI 784 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373619</link>
    <description>A subordinate foreign trade notification became operative only on publication in the Official Gazette, so an earlier trade notice did not itself trigger the import restriction. The notification&#039;s exemption for imports under irrevocable letters of credit was confined to letters entered into before the date stated in the notification, and that specific stipulation prevailed over the general policy language. The challenge to validity also failed because the notification was treated as an act of the Central Government, with the Directorate General of Foreign Trade functioning only as the issuing office. The notification was therefore upheld in full and the writ petitions were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2019 14:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=553329" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 784 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373619</link>
      <description>A subordinate foreign trade notification became operative only on publication in the Official Gazette, so an earlier trade notice did not itself trigger the import restriction. The notification&#039;s exemption for imports under irrevocable letters of credit was confined to letters entered into before the date stated in the notification, and that specific stipulation prevailed over the general policy language. The challenge to validity also failed because the notification was treated as an act of the Central Government, with the Directorate General of Foreign Trade functioning only as the issuing office. The notification was therefore upheld in full and the writ petitions were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373619</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>