https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773625 A public notice issued by the DGFT could not lawfully impose a condition excluding warehoused goods already lying at Indian ports from clearance against a subsequently issued tariff rate quota authorisation, because such a restriction altered substantive foreign trade policy beyond the DGFT's procedural role. The Gujarat HC held the condition ultra vires and without jurisdiction, and set it aside. Once the restriction fell, the balance warehoused quantity was entitled to clearance against the quota, and excess duty paid on earlier clearance was refundable with interest, consistent with the customs rule that duty is determined by the bill of entry for home consumption. en-us Thu, 20 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 26 Jun 2025 08:35:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773625 A public notice issued by the DGFT could not lawfully impose a condition excluding warehoused goods already lying at Indian ports from clearance against a subsequently issued tariff rate quota authorisation, because such a restriction altered substantive foreign trade policy beyond the DGFT's procedural role. The Gujarat HC held the condition ultra vires and without jurisdiction, and set it aside. Once the restriction fell, the balance warehoused quantity was entitled to clearance against the quota, and excess duty paid on earlier clearance was refundable with interest, consistent with the customs rule that duty is determined by the bill of entry for home consumption. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 20 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773625