<?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>1993 (8) TMI 69 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43634</link>
    <description>The court upheld the Government of India&#039;s authority to amend import policies at any time, emphasizing that import policy amendments take effect upon publication of public notice. Import restrictions imposed post-public notice were deemed valid, and the petitioners were not entitled to relief under the amended policy. The court rejected the application of promissory estoppel in policy matters, allowing adjudication proceedings against the petitioners and directing enforcement of orders, including payment to the State Trading Corporation of India and continuation of the bank guarantee. The petition was dismissed, with costs awarded to the respondents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Jun 2010 11:37:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=82163" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1993 (8) TMI 69 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43634</link>
      <description>The court upheld the Government of India&#039;s authority to amend import policies at any time, emphasizing that import policy amendments take effect upon publication of public notice. Import restrictions imposed post-public notice were deemed valid, and the petitioners were not entitled to relief under the amended policy. The court rejected the application of promissory estoppel in policy matters, allowing adjudication proceedings against the petitioners and directing enforcement of orders, including payment to the State Trading Corporation of India and continuation of the bank guarantee. The petition was dismissed, with costs awarded to the respondents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 1993 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=43634</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>