<?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>2021 (7) TMI 1034 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410192</link>
    <description>MEIS scrip registration was considered unsustainable where the exporter had received foreign exchange, the FTWZ served only as a warehousing or logistics facility, and the export was treated in substance as the petitioner&#039;s export through that arrangement. The text states that entitlement under MEIS must still be tested against policy exclusions, but a scrip issued after due scrutiny cannot be denied registration on a later administrative view of ineligibility unless it is first cancelled under the governing cancellation provision. It also notes that the refusal was not treated as appealable for want of a statutory appellate remedy. Relief was therefore granted to the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Feb 2022 16:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=650769" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (7) TMI 1034 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410192</link>
      <description>MEIS scrip registration was considered unsustainable where the exporter had received foreign exchange, the FTWZ served only as a warehousing or logistics facility, and the export was treated in substance as the petitioner&#039;s export through that arrangement. The text states that entitlement under MEIS must still be tested against policy exclusions, but a scrip issued after due scrutiny cannot be denied registration on a later administrative view of ineligibility unless it is first cancelled under the governing cancellation provision. It also notes that the refusal was not treated as appealable for want of a statutory appellate remedy. Relief was therefore granted to the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jun 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=410192</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>