<?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>RoDTEP eligibility for restricted sugar exports cannot be denied where exports were made under permitted quota and approval.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99033</link>
    <description>Exports of white refined sugar made under specific permission and approved quota could not be denied RoDTEP benefits merely because sugar had been placed in the restricted category. The HC held that the restriction did not amount to a total prohibition or absolute ineligibility under the scheme, and that denial on the footing that such exports were prohibited was based on a misreading of the notification and scheme conditions. Applying the principle of uniform interpretation of Central statutes and relying on prior Gujarat HC precedent that had attained finality, the Court directed grant or restoration of RoDTEP benefits, refund of amounts already recovered with interest, and stoppage of coercive recovery.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 08:47:19 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 08:47:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=897749" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>RoDTEP eligibility for restricted sugar exports cannot be denied where exports were made under permitted quota and approval.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99033</link>
      <description>Exports of white refined sugar made under specific permission and approved quota could not be denied RoDTEP benefits merely because sugar had been placed in the restricted category. The HC held that the restriction did not amount to a total prohibition or absolute ineligibility under the scheme, and that denial on the footing that such exports were prohibited was based on a misreading of the notification and scheme conditions. Applying the principle of uniform interpretation of Central statutes and relying on prior Gujarat HC precedent that had attained finality, the Court directed grant or restoration of RoDTEP benefits, refund of amounts already recovered with interest, and stoppage of coercive recovery.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 08:47:19 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99033</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>