https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51791 A restriction allowing synthetic rags to be imported only through Bombay and Delhi ports was treated as discriminatory and arbitrary because it disadvantaged importers in other regions, and administrative inconvenience was not accepted as justification. The same import control condition and connected public notice were applied consistently with the prior view taken in the importer's own matter and the Calcutta High Court's approach. The restriction was held invalid, without jurisdiction, and ultra vires Section 3 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, as inconsistent with Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 301 of the Constitution. Consequential relief was granted. en-us Thu, 11 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Sep 2010 13:34:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51791 A restriction allowing synthetic rags to be imported only through Bombay and Delhi ports was treated as discriminatory and arbitrary because it disadvantaged importers in other regions, and administrative inconvenience was not accepted as justification. The same import control condition and connected public notice were applied consistently with the prior view taken in the importer's own matter and the Calcutta High Court's approach. The restriction was held invalid, without jurisdiction, and ultra vires Section 3 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, as inconsistent with Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 301 of the Constitution. Consequential relief was granted. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 11 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51791