<?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>2002 (3) TMI 56 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46245</link>
    <description>A customs exemption granted in public interest under statutory power was upheld because the distinction between a Government-controlled undertaking and private importers was held to be rational and not discriminatory under Article 14. The court found that the exemption served a pricing policy the Government could regulate through the public undertaking&#039;s imports, so the higher import price for the private petitioner did not amount to an unconstitutional classification. It further held that a price-control or duty-reduction measure is not an unreasonable restriction on trade merely because it reduces private profit margins or causes loss, so there was no violation of Article 19(1)(g). The challenge to the exemption notifications therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 16:33:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=84771" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (3) TMI 56 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46245</link>
      <description>A customs exemption granted in public interest under statutory power was upheld because the distinction between a Government-controlled undertaking and private importers was held to be rational and not discriminatory under Article 14. The court found that the exemption served a pricing policy the Government could regulate through the public undertaking&#039;s imports, so the higher import price for the private petitioner did not amount to an unconstitutional classification. It further held that a price-control or duty-reduction measure is not an unreasonable restriction on trade merely because it reduces private profit margins or causes loss, so there was no violation of Article 19(1)(g). The challenge to the exemption notifications therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46245</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>