TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 42X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 62, goods imported into India against valid AAs were exempted from the whole of the duty of customs leviable thereon which was specified in the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and from the whole of the additional duty, safeguard duty, transitional product specific safeguard duty and anti-dumping duty leviable thereon, respectively, under Sections 3, 8B, 8C and 9A of the Act. The GST regime came into force with effect from 01-07-2017. However, no corresponding amendment was carried out to this notification but Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 was amended by substituting Sections 3 (7) and (9), whereby levy of integrated tax [under Section 5 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and levy of Goods and Service Tax compensation cess leviable under Section 8 of the GST Act (Compensation to States) Cess Act, 2017] was incorporated. Since IGST and compensation cess was levied against AAs, they were apparently challenged before the Delhi High Court in several petitions, wherein interim relief was granted. Because of the initial problems relating to GST, the committed refund of IGST got delayed, resulting in blocking of working capital for many busines ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fying that the inputs had been utilized fully (wastage excluded) for producing the final export goods. The re-shaping of their businesses caused inconvenience to them. Yet, that cannot be a ground to hold that the insertion of the pre-import condition , was arbitrary, as the High Court concluded. There is no constitutional compulsion that whilst framing a new law, or policies under a new legislation particularly when an entirely different set of fiscal norms are created, overhauling the taxation structure, concessions hitherto granted or given should necessarily be continued in the same fashion as they were in the past. When a new set of laws are enacted, the legislature s effort is to on the one hand, assimilate- as far as practicable, the past regime - the exclusion of benefit of imports in anticipation of AAs, and requiring payment of duties, under Sections 3 (7) and (9) of Customs Tariff Act, 1975, with the pre-import condition , cannot be characterized as arbitrary or unreasonable. The High Court was persuaded to hold that the subsequent notification of 10.01.2019 withdrew the pre-import condition meant that the Union itself recognized its unworkable and unfeasible ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed into India for the production of goods to be exported from India, on the strength of an advance authorization Paragraph 4.03 of FTP ( AA ) was arbitrary and unreasonable. I. Background 2. In terms of the Foreign Trade (Development Regulation) Act, 1992 ( FTDRA ) the Central Government ( Union ) had been framing, from time to time, Export-Import Policies (or FTPs) for the development, regulation and control of imports and exports in the country. The Union announced duty exemption schemes as well. One among these was the AA. To regulate and guide the procedure to be followed for implementing the provisions of the FTP and the rules framed thereunder, the Director General of Foreign Trade ( DGFT ) notified the HBP, chapter 4 of which prescribed the procedure for availing duty exemption / remission schemes. By paragraph 4.27, exports in anticipation of authorisation were permitted, so as not to create hindrances and delays in execution of export orders. At the time, Notification No. 18 / 2015-Customs dated 1.04.2015 exempted payment of basic customs duty ( BCD ), additional duty (countervailing duty ( CVD ), special additional duty ( SAD )), safeguard duty and anti-du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. When it was established that goods imported against a particular AA were used in relation to manufacture of finished goods exported for fulfilment of export obligation of that particular authorisation, the pre-import condition stood satisfied. 6. In view of this development, the exemption granted by Notification No. 18 / 2015-Customs was inadmissible where manufacturer-exporters, who undertook manufacturing and export of goods in a continuous cycle, could not prove the above. Exemption was also not admissible when goods manufactured were exported in anticipation of licence / authorisation, since they were exports made first, with duty-free import against the authorisation having been undertaken later. Consequently, the manufacturer-exporters aggrieved by this interpretation approached the High Court. II. Arguments of the Revenue before the High Court 7. The Revenue contended that exemption from paying duty was not a matter of right, and was granted by the State keeping in mind general public interest. The criterion for determination of legality of any notification was always whether the authority acted within its jurisdiction while issuing such notification or not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ervice to both central and state governments including taxpayers and other stakeholders. The registration front end services, returns, and payments to all taxpayers were provided by GSTN , the committed refund of IGST was getting delayed. This resulted in blocking of working capital for many business houses. To obviate this problem, the GST Council allowed exemption from IGST when imported under AAs. The Directorate General of Foreign Trade ( DGFT ) accordingly, issued Notification No. 33/2015-20 dated 13.10.2017 which was backed by Customs Notification No. 79/2017 dated 13.10.2017, issued by the Department of Revenue, amending the Notification No. 18 / 2015-Customs, dated 1.4.2015. The Revenue further urged that exemption from the IGST leviable under Section 3 (7) was available and subject to two specific conditions. The conditions were (i) export obligation was to be fulfilled through physical exports only; and (ii) the exemption was subject to pre-import condition , which implied that only after the import of the goods commenced, were they required to be used for manufacture of export goods, which were ultimately exported. 9. According to the Revenue, a cut-off date could h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... verseas buyers, within minimum six months time for completion of the cycle. The court considered this to be an unfeasible condition: Considering the above interpretation of the condition of physical export and pre-import put forth by the DRI, it is more or less impossible to make any exports under an Advance Authorisation without violating the condition of pre-import. In effect and substance, what is given by one hand is taken away by the other. In other words, in the light of the condition of pre-import, the benefit of exemption from levy of integrated tax and GST compensation cess becomes more or less illusory. Supra note 1, para 27 13. It was noted that while the pre-import condition was levied on duties collected under Sections 3 (7) and (9) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, in respect of the levies under Sections 3 (1), (3) and (5) no pre-import condition was imposed. The result was that if the importer wanted benefit of exemption from the levy of integrated tax and compensation cess, the fact that other levies were not subject to pre-import condition was immaterial because the same inputs were subject to it. This resulted in inputs being subject to pre-impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . IV. The Union s Contentions before this Court 15. Mr. N. Venkatraman, learned Additional Solicitor General ( ASG ) appearing for the Union, urged that the essence of the AA was that the exporters were expected to import duty-free materials first, and use them for the purpose of manufacture of products to be exported out of India or be supplied under deemed export, if allowed by the FTP or the customs notifications. This aspect of physical incorporation of input materials in the export goods was covered under paragraph 4.03 of the FTP, which specifically demanded physical incorporation of imported materials in export goods which was possible only if imports were made prior to export. Therefore, such authorizations principally had an inbuilt pre-import condition which had to be followed. Paragraph 4.27 of the HBP for the relevant period allowed exports / supplies in anticipation of an authorization. This was an exception, to meet requirement in case of exigencies. However, importers and exporters were availing the benefit of that provision without exception and the export goods were made out of domestically or otherwise procured materials and duty-free imported goods we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nfined the scope of paragraph 4.27(a). The moment paragraph 4.27(d) came into picture, paragraph 4.27(a) became inoperative. 19. It was also urged that there was no conflict between paragraph 4.03 of the FTP and that of 4.27(a) of the HBP. The scope and field of operation of individual paragraphs were completely different. Paragraph 4.03(a) of the FTP provided that: (a) Advance Authorisation is issued to allow duty free import of input, which is physically incorporated in export product (making normal allowance for wastage). In addition, fuel, oil, catalyst which is consumed / utilized in the process of production of export product, may also be allowed. Paragraph 4.03(a) of the FTP 20. The object and spirit of the AA scheme to allow duty free import of input, which was to be physically incorporated in export product, was clear. The relevant customs notifications too, referred to paragraph 4.03, which provided that the AA was issued in terms of its provision for extending exemption. The provision of physical incorporation of the inputs in the export goods, was necessary for the purpose of the scheme, for two reasons. One, that input materials actually imported were to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt failed to notice that DGFT was duly empowered to issue Notification No.33/2015-20 dated 13.10.2017. This notification was general in nature and did not exclude any goods from its purview. The only condition was that wherever the importer wanted to avail the benefit of IGST and compensation cess exemption, the pre-import condition had to be satisfied. In absence of any negative list containing specific mention of a set of goods, which were not to be covered by the said provision, all goods were covered by the said notification and subject to a uniform condition. It was also urged that it was neither practicable nor possible to specify each conceivable item for that purpose. In absence of any negative list in the notification, such pre-import condition was applicable for all goods to be imported. 22. The ASG urged that the High Court erred in construing the purpose of Appendix 4J- issued in tandem with paragraph 4.22 of the FTP during the material period (under paragraph 4.42 of the HBP), which stated the export obligation period with respect to various goods that were allowed to be imported. Paragraph 4.22 was a general provision, specifying 18 months as the export obligat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich such levies were imposed, and the manner in which they were collected, were within the domain of the legislature or Parliament. Unless it was shown that the statute imposed a method of collection that was capricious, or arbitrary, the courts ought not to interfere with the levy. Similarly, a levy could fail if there was no mechanism for assessment and collection. Reliance was placed on the decisions reported as Khandige Sham Bhat v Agricultural Income Tax Officer 1963 (3) SCR 809 ; Assistant Commissioner of Urban Land Tax v Buckingham Carnatic Co Ltd. 1970 (1) SCR 268 ; R.K. Garg v Union of India 1981 (1) SCR 947 ; Union of India v VKC Footsteps India (P) Ltd 2022 (2) SCC 603 . It was submitted that the courts ought to be circumspect while interpreting any fiscal legislation, and not hold either the provisions or terms of exemptions, or conditions imposed by the law, or through delegated legislation, as unreasonable, or arbitrary. The learned ASG urged that being a new legislation, the Union had to take into account divergent views and norms, and refashioning of the entire indirect tax spectrum was called for. 25. It was lastly urged that the introduction of Notificati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uties. If pre-import condition was applicable for AA, then the whole scheme would be nullified because it was impossible for any manufacturer-importer to satisfy the pre-import condition when the export orders were to be executed by supplying the final products within a short period of 4 weeks to 8 weeks after receiving the purchase orders from overseas customers. In a typical case, the manufacturer-exporter could export goods only after more than six months from receiving the purchase orders, if the pre-import condition was to be satisfied. Consequently, the delivery schedule of about 4 to 8 weeks from receiving purchase orders could not have been fulfilled. It was additionally argued that all imports under an authorization were subject to actual user condition . Therefore, manufacturer exporters were not allowed to sell or dispose of input raw materials imported free of duties against any authorization. Regular exporters conducted their business in a cycle, i.e., by importing input-raw materials free of duties against several authorizations granted to them, and utilizing such goods for manufacturing final products for export with reference to those several authorizations. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sequently used for manufacturing export products. 34. Learned counsel for the respondents highlighted that there was no reason for differential treatment of BCD and IGST under the AA scheme. When the levy of IGST on imported goods was treated like the levy of BCD, there was no reason why the unconditional exemption of BCD granted to license holders under the scheme could not be extended to the IGST exemption available for goods imported under the same scheme. This differential treatment meted out to the IGST benefit when compared to the BCD exemption under the original Notification No. 18 / 2015-Customs was not justified and failed the test of reasonable classification under Article 14 of the Constitution. There was no intelligible differentia between the two in denying the benefit for IGST while granting exemption for BCD. There was also no rationale behind the classification IGST and BCD for exemption, at par with the objectives under the scheme. 35. Learned counsel for the respondents relied on Union of India (UOI) and Ors. vs. N.S. Rathnam Sons 2015 (8) SCR 751 which held that grant of different exemption based on unintelligible differentia between two categories of assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort raw materials or inputs at zero customs duty for production of export products. The purpose of this scheme is to ensure competitiveness of India s products in the global market. When duties paid on raw materials are saved, it reduces the cost of the final export product. In terms of the scheme, the exporter can import raw materials duty-free. As per Chapter 9 of FTP paragraph 9.44, Raw material is input(s) required for manufacturing of goods. These inputs either can be in a raw / natural / unrefined / unmanufactured or manufactured state. Advance Licenses are issued to allow duty-free import of inputs, which are then physically incorporated in export goods (after making normal allowance for wastage). In addition to this, fuel, oil, the catalyst which is consumed / utilized in the process of production of export product, may also be allowed. Imports under an AA were exempted from the payment of Basic Customs Duty (BCD), Additional Customs Duty, Education Cess, Anti-dumping Duty, Countervailing Duty (CVD), Safeguard Duty, and Transition Product Specific Safeguard Duty, wherever applicable. 39. The principal challenge before the High Court, was to the pre-import conditio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9;Actual User' condition. The same shall not be transferable even after completion of export obligation. However, Authorisation holder will have option to dispose of product manufactured out of duty free input once export obligation is completed. (ii) In case where CENVAT/input tax credit facility on input has been availed for the exported goods, even after completion of export obligation, the goods imported against such Advance Authorisation shall be utilized only in the manufacture of dutiable goods whether within the same factory or outside (by a supporting manufacturer). For this, the Authorisation holder shall produce a certificate from either the jurisdictional Customs Authority or Chartered Accountant, at the option of the exporter, at the time of filing application for Export Obligation Discharge Certificate to Regional Authority concerned. (iii) Waste/Scrap arising out of manufacturing process, as allowed, can be disposed off on payment of applicable duty even before fulfillment of export obligation. 42. Exercising powers conferred under paragraph 1.03 of FTP, the DGFT notified the HBP by a Public Notice dated 01.04.2015. Paragraph 4.27 (a) provides for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion to States) Cess Act, 2017] was incorporated: (7) Any article which is imported into India shall, in addition, be liable to integrated tax at such rate, not exceeding 40% as is leviable under section 5 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 on a like article on its supply in India, on the value of the imported article as determined under sub-section (8). ********* **************** (9) Any article which is imported into India shall, in addition, be liable to the Goods and Services Tax compensation cess at such rate, as is leviable under section 8 of the Goods and Services Tax (Compensation to States) Cess Act, 2017 on a like article on its supply in India, on the value of the imported article as determined under sub-section (10). 45. Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended after the coming into force of the GST regime, provided for levy of the following additional duties: (1) levy of a duty (referred to as additional duty) equal to the excise duty for the time being leviable on a like article if produced or manufactured in India [Section 3 (1) CTA]; (2) levy of such additional duty as would counter-balance the excise duty leviabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat notwithstanding anything contained hereinabove for the said authorisations where the exemption from integrated tax and the goods and services tax compensation cess leviable thereon under sub-section (7) and sub-section (9) of section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act, has been availed, the export obligation shall be fulfilled by physical exports only. The said notification also inserted condition (xii) which reads thus: (xii) that the exemption from integrated tax and the goods and services tax compensation cess leviable thereon under sub-section (7) and sub-section (9) of section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act shall be subject to pre-import condition. 48. Thus, exemption from levy of IGST under Section 3 (7) and compensation cess leviable under Section 3 (9) of Customs Tariff Act, 1975 were subject to the conditions that the export obligation shall be fulfilled by physical exports only and shall also be subject to pre-import condition . Together with the amendment of the exemption notification, by Notification No. 33/2015-2020 (dated 13-10-2017), paragraph 4.14 of the FTP was also amended to read as follows: 4.14: Details of Duties exempted. Imports under Adva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be utilized as per GST rules. Advance Release Order facility shall not be available for procurement of inputs 11nder Advance Authorization scheme except for inputs listed in Schedule 4 of Central Excise Act, 1944 read with The Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act 2017 No 18 of 2017, with effect from July l, 2017. RAs are directed not to issue ARO except for Schedulc-4 items as stated above. Imports/exports under the replenishment schemes for the Gems and Jewellery sector covered under chapter 4 of FTP and HBP shall be subject to Customs Notification issued/ to be issued in this regard. 50. The public notice clearly forewarned that AAs and their utilisation would not continue in the same manner as the AA scheme was operating hitherto. This trade notice has escaped the attention of the High Court, since there is no advertence to it in the impugned order, or a discussion about it. Likewise, the HBP was amended, and paragraph 4.27 (d) was inserted, which stated that duty free authorisation for inputs subject to pre-import condition could not be issued. The said clause is as follows: (iv) No Duty Free Import Authorisation shall be issued for an input which is subjected to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ic goods and, the notifications impugned, inasmuch as they apply pre-import condition to all goods, is contrary to the provision. Further, the absence of pre-import conditions in respect of basic customs duty, and other levies, where in anticipation of AAs, duty free imports can be made, in contradistinction with the need to follow such pre-import conditions in respect of IGST and compensation cess, rendered the AAs worthless. Lastly, it was held that exporters, who have to import inputs, would face impossibility in fulfilling the pre-import condition , because the normal cycle of import of inputs and export of finished products would be for a period of six months, whereas the period, which the regime permits, would work out to three months. 56. It would be necessary to first analyse the introduction of the pre-import condition . The FTP, inter alia, facilitated AAs for duty-free import of input, which is physically incorporated in export product, making normal allowance for wastage (paragraph 4.03 of the FTP). No doubt, the rationale or object behind this was to smoothen and facilitate export trade, ensuring that finished goods, meant for export, did not suffer a compet ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r which AAs can be issued, somewhat expansively and prescribes that (c) Advance Authorization shall be issued for: (i) Physical export (including export to SEZ); (ii) Intermediate supply; and/ or (iii) Supply of goods to the categories mentioned in paragraph 7.02 (b), (c), (e), (f) (g) and (h) of this FTP. (iv) Supply of 'stores' on board of foreign going vessel / aircraft, subject to condition that there is specific Standard Input Output Norms in respect of item supplied. The definition extends in specific terms (under Chapter 4 of FTP) - supplies made to SEZ are considered as physical exports despite not being an event in which goods are being taken out of India. The other three categories defined under (c) (ii), (iii) (iv) are ineligible as physical exports . Supplies of intermediate goods are covered by letter of invalidation, whereas supplies covered under Chapter 7 of the FTP are considered as deemed exports . These supplies are ineligible for being considered physical exports . Therefore, any category of supply, be it under letter of invalidation and/or to EOU and/or under International Competitive Bidding (ICB) and/or to Mega P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es, as inputs, should continue, but that for the new levies, the system of input credit, and refunds should prevail. 62. In this court s opinion, the introduction of the pre-import condition may have resulted in hardship to the exporters, because even whilst they fulfilled the physical export criteria, they could not continue with their former business practices of importing inputs, after applying for AAs, to fulfil their overseas contractual obligations. The new dispensation required them to pay the two duties, and then claim refunds, after satisfying that the inputs had been utilized fully (wastage excluded) for producing the final export goods. The re-shaping of their businesses caused inconvenience to them. Yet, that cannot be a ground to hold that the insertion of the pre-import condition , was arbitrary, as the High Court concluded. It was held, in Rohitash Kumar Ors. v Om Prakash Sharma Ors (2013) 11 SCC 451 that inconvenience or hardship is not a ground for the court to interpret the plain language of the statute differently, to give relief. In Mysore SEB v. Bangalore Woolen Cotton Silk Mills Ltd. AIR 1963 SC 1128 a Constitution Bench of this Court held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f withdrawal of exemption was not retrospective: Thus while Sub-section (1) authorizes the grant of an exemption or reduction in rate with retrospective effect in respect of any tax payable under the Act, Sub-section (3) does not provide for any cancellation or variation retrospectively. In the circumstances, this decision has no application to the facts of this case, because the facility of AA without pre import condition was introduced prospectively. 65. The respondents had alleged discrimination on two counts: one, that for purposes of classification, all exporters who were granted AAs were to be treated alike; and two, that insisting on the pre-import condition in respect to exemption from two levies only, while granting that benefit in respect of other AAs, was discriminatory. As far as the first aspect is concerned, the impugned judgment, in this court s opinion, is on a misreading of the FTP. As noted earlier, paragraph 4.13 (i) itself empowered the DGFT to include articles, which are not specified in Appendix-4J. The existence of this discretion means that there is flexibility in regard to the nature of policies to be adopted, having regard to the state of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring the death of all male children born on a particular day because one of them would some day bring about his downfall employed such a classification. 56. The first question, therefore, is, whether the exclusion of establishments carrying on business or trade and employing less than 50 persons makes the classification under-inclusive, when it is seen that all factories employing 10 or 20 persons, as the case may be, have been included and that the purpose of the law is to get in unpaid accumulations for the welfare of the labour. Since the classification does not include all who are similarly situated with respect to the purpose of the law, the classification might appear, at first blush, to be unreasonable. But the Court has recognised the very real difficulties under which legislatures operate - difficulties arising out of both the nature of the legislative process and of the society which legislation attempts perennially to reshape - and it has refused to strike down indiscriminately all legislation embodying classificatory inequality here under consideration. Mr. Justice Holmes, in urging tolerance of under-inclusive classifications, stated that such legislation should n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... introducing reforms. The law need not apply to all the persons in the sense of having a universal application to all persons. A law can be sustained if it deals equally with the people of well-defined class-employees of insurance companies as such and such a law is not open to the charge of denial of equal protection on the ground that it had no application to other persons. Likewise, Javed v. State of Haryana (2003) 8 SCC 369 observed that there is no constitutional compulsion that a law or policy should be implemented all at once: 16. A uniform policy may be devised by the Centre or by a State. However, there is no constitutional requirement that any such policy must be implemented at one go. Policies are capable of being implemented in a phased manner. More so, when the policies have far-reaching implications and are dynamic in nature, their implementation in a phased manner is welcome for it receives gradual willing acceptance and invites lesser resistance. 67. Therefore, there is no constitutional compulsion that whilst framing a new law, or policies under a new legislation particularly when an entirely different set of fiscal norms are created, overhauling ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asonable ways. Even so, large latitude is allowed to the State for classification upon a reasonable basis and what is reasonable is a question of practical details and a variety of factors which the Court will be reluctant and perhaps ill- equipped to investigate . 69. The object behind imposing the pre-import condition is discernible from paragraph 4.03 of FTP and Annexure-4J of the HBP; that only few articles were enumerated when the FTP was published, is no ground for the exporters to complain that other articles could not be included for the purpose of pre-import condition ; as held earlier, that is the import of paragraph 4.03 (i). The numerous schemes in the FTP are to maintain an equilibrium between exporters claims, on the one hand and on the other hand, to preserve the Revenue s interests. Here, what is involved is exemption and postponement of exemption of IGST, a new levy altogether, whose mechanism was being worked out and evolved, for the first time. The plea of impossibility to fulfil pre-import conditions under old AAs was made, suggesting that the notifications retrospectively mandated new conditions. The exporter respondents argument that there is no ra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 169 . that: A claim to refund is governed by statute. There is no constitutional entitlement to seek a refund. Parliament has in Clause (i) of the first proviso allowed a refund of the unutilized ITC in the case of zero-rated supplies made without payment of tax. Under Clause (ii) of the first proviso, Parliament has envisaged a refund of unutilized ITC, where the credit has accumulated on account of the rate of tax on inputs being higher than the rate of tax on output supplies. When there is neither a constitutional guarantee nor a statutory entitlement to refund, the submission that goods and services must necessarily be treated at par on a matter of a refund of unutilized ITC cannot be accepted. Such an interpretation, if carried to its logical conclusion would involve unforeseen consequences, circumscribing the legislative discretion of Parliament to fashion the rate of tax, concessions and exemptions. If the judiciary were to do so, it would run the risk of encroaching upon legislative choices, and on policy decisions which are the prerogative of the executive. 73. In this court s opinion, what applies to refunds, (the right to which can be curtailed legitimately) ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
