<?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>2019 (6) TMI 1749 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465564</link>
    <description>Withdrawn port restriction notifications could not continue to sustain challenge or bonded obligations, so imports made under interim orders were to be regularized and the petitioners discharged from those bonds. A notification fixing a minimum import price for betel nuts was treated as a policy measure within executive domain and was not invalid merely for want of public interest, because the record disclosed representations, deliberations, and a protective purpose for domestic farmers. Judicial review would not interfere absent arbitrariness, illegality, unreasonableness, or mala fides, and the floor price notification was upheld as a valid measure in larger public interest.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2025 18:15:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=875057" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (6) TMI 1749 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465564</link>
      <description>Withdrawn port restriction notifications could not continue to sustain challenge or bonded obligations, so imports made under interim orders were to be regularized and the petitioners discharged from those bonds. A notification fixing a minimum import price for betel nuts was treated as a policy measure within executive domain and was not invalid merely for want of public interest, because the record disclosed representations, deliberations, and a protective purpose for domestic farmers. Judicial review would not interfere absent arbitrariness, illegality, unreasonableness, or mala fides, and the floor price notification was upheld as a valid measure in larger public interest.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=465564</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>