https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391792 A notification amending Exim Code entries was upheld because it was, in substance, issued by the Central Government under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulations) Act, 1992. The challenge failed on authentication: Rule 12 of the Authentication (Orders and other Instruments) Rules, 2002 permits the DGFT to sign and authenticate instruments made in the name of the President of India, and such authentication does not change the source of the power exercised. The Court treated the DGFT's signature as a valid mode of authentication and rejected the claim that the notification was ultra vires for want of authority. en-us Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Nov 2020 12:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391792 A notification amending Exim Code entries was upheld because it was, in substance, issued by the Central Government under the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulations) Act, 1992. The challenge failed on authentication: Rule 12 of the Authentication (Orders and other Instruments) Rules, 2002 permits the DGFT to sign and authenticate instruments made in the name of the President of India, and such authentication does not change the source of the power exercised. The Court treated the DGFT's signature as a valid mode of authentication and rejected the claim that the notification was ultra vires for want of authority. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 30 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391792