<?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>2024 (2) TMI 1102 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449951</link>
    <description>The Target Plus Scheme&#039;s 24-month duty credit certificate validity was treated as a valid procedural prescription within the delegated Foreign Trade Policy framework, and not an unauthorised curtailment of the concession. The 2017 customs amendment was viewed as a post-GST alignment of the exemption notification, excluding IGST and GST compensation cess without taking away any vested right to use the scrip for those levies. The later issuance of duty credit scrips did not justify judicial extension of the scheme period, because equity cannot enlarge a fiscal concession beyond its prescribed terms; only administrative consideration under the policy relaxation mechanism remained available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jan 2026 15:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=744595" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 1102 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449951</link>
      <description>The Target Plus Scheme&#039;s 24-month duty credit certificate validity was treated as a valid procedural prescription within the delegated Foreign Trade Policy framework, and not an unauthorised curtailment of the concession. The 2017 customs amendment was viewed as a post-GST alignment of the exemption notification, excluding IGST and GST compensation cess without taking away any vested right to use the scrip for those levies. The later issuance of duty credit scrips did not justify judicial extension of the scheme period, because equity cannot enlarge a fiscal concession beyond its prescribed terms; only administrative consideration under the policy relaxation mechanism remained available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449951</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>