<?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>2023 (6) TMI 423 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438849</link>
    <description>The Foreign Trade Policy treated deemed exports as available where supplied goods were manufactured in India, and its definition of manufacture in Clause 9.36 was broad enough to include processes such as testing, calibration and re-engineering. Because the purchase order required performance guarantee tests and inspection before supply, testing formed part of the supply obligation. The matter needed fresh verification on whether indigenous components were actually added and whether the overall processes amounted to manufacture under the policy. The impugned order could not stand as it was and had to be reconsidered on those factual and legal questions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2026 11:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=716112" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (6) TMI 423 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438849</link>
      <description>The Foreign Trade Policy treated deemed exports as available where supplied goods were manufactured in India, and its definition of manufacture in Clause 9.36 was broad enough to include processes such as testing, calibration and re-engineering. Because the purchase order required performance guarantee tests and inspection before supply, testing formed part of the supply obligation. The matter needed fresh verification on whether indigenous components were actually added and whether the overall processes amounted to manufacture under the policy. The impugned order could not stand as it was and had to be reconsidered on those factual and legal questions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438849</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>