<?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>2003 (3) TMI 135 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46796</link>
    <description>Concessional customs duty under the notification for jumbo rolls of photographic colour paper was available only where the importer satisfied the specified conditions, including an industrial licence under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 and an undertaking to convert the rolls. Importers who did not hold the required licence, and who had not taken effective steps to obtain the corresponding carry-on-business licence within time, could not claim the concession. The distinction between licensed and unlicensed importers was treated as a rational classification linked to the policy of limiting the exemption to regulated undertakings, and the exemption notification was not treated as an enforceable promise in favour of the importer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Jul 2010 10:13:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=85316" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (3) TMI 135 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46796</link>
      <description>Concessional customs duty under the notification for jumbo rolls of photographic colour paper was available only where the importer satisfied the specified conditions, including an industrial licence under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 and an undertaking to convert the rolls. Importers who did not hold the required licence, and who had not taken effective steps to obtain the corresponding carry-on-business licence within time, could not claim the concession. The distinction between licensed and unlicensed importers was treated as a rational classification linked to the policy of limiting the exemption to regulated undertakings, and the exemption notification was not treated as an enforceable promise in favour of the importer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46796</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>