<?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>2020 (7) TMI 389 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396720</link>
    <description>The import of poppy seeds from Turkey was held subject to a valid Country Cap framework under the Import Policy, National Policy, Guidelines, and the India-Turkey Memorandum of Understanding, which together allow annual quantities to be fixed by the Indian authorities after considering stock, production, domestic supply, and other relevant factors. The availability of exportable stock in Turkey was only one consideration, so the cap of 18,000 MT was not shown to be arbitrary or unlawful. Contract registration was also upheld because the Guidelines required verification that the sales contract appeared on the Turkish Grain Board online system, and the record did not show that the petitioners&#039; contracts had been reflected there or that any first come first serve method was proved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Feb 2021 11:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=617594" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (7) TMI 389 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396720</link>
      <description>The import of poppy seeds from Turkey was held subject to a valid Country Cap framework under the Import Policy, National Policy, Guidelines, and the India-Turkey Memorandum of Understanding, which together allow annual quantities to be fixed by the Indian authorities after considering stock, production, domestic supply, and other relevant factors. The availability of exportable stock in Turkey was only one consideration, so the cap of 18,000 MT was not shown to be arbitrary or unlawful. Contract registration was also upheld because the Guidelines required verification that the sales contract appeared on the Turkish Grain Board online system, and the record did not show that the petitioners&#039; contracts had been reflected there or that any first come first serve method was proved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396720</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>