<?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 (8) TMI 1387 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385198</link>
    <description>The Bombay High Court upheld import-regulating guidelines for poppy seeds, including country caps, contract registration and quantitative limits, holding that importers had no fundamental right to import free from regulation. The Court found the scheme supported by the narcotics and foreign trade framework, which permits control and quantitative restriction of imports, and by the objective of preventing cartelisation, artificial blocking of country caps and exclusion of non-genuine importers. Mere preference for the earlier lottery system, without evidence of manifest arbitrariness, invidious discrimination or lack of statutory authority, was insufficient to invalidate the policy.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Feb 2021 16:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=585506" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 1387 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385198</link>
      <description>The Bombay High Court upheld import-regulating guidelines for poppy seeds, including country caps, contract registration and quantitative limits, holding that importers had no fundamental right to import free from regulation. The Court found the scheme supported by the narcotics and foreign trade framework, which permits control and quantitative restriction of imports, and by the objective of preventing cartelisation, artificial blocking of country caps and exclusion of non-genuine importers. Mere preference for the earlier lottery system, without evidence of manifest arbitrariness, invidious discrimination or lack of statutory authority, was insufficient to invalidate the policy.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385198</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>