1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Tribunal clarifies duty exemption entitlements & rates on consignments cleared under CT-3 certificate</h1> The Tribunal allowed the appeal partly, confirming a reduced duty demand while setting aside other components of the demand. The judgment clarified the ... SSI Exemption β Applying higher rate of duty merely because of erronous mention of higher rate in βCT-3β β As per Rule 173N, in event of failure to produce warehousing certificate, the βduty leviableβ on consignment is to be paid β Exemption of Not. 9/2000 (concession rate of duty) is allowed Issues:1. Benefit of exemption under notification No. 9/20002. Applicability of duty rate on consignments cleared under CT-3 certificateAnalysis:1. The dispute revolved around the appellant's claim for exemption under notification No. 9/2000. The Tribunal had earlier directed the lower authority to redetermine the duty liability considering this exemption. The adjudicating authority did not allow the exemption, citing various reasons. The appellant argued that they were entitled to the exemption based on statutory records showing benefit given in other clearances. The Tribunal agreed with the appellant, stating that the lower authority erred in not allowing the exemption. The duty demand was confirmed to a reduced amount, and the rest of the demand, penalty, and interest were set aside.2. Another issue was the duty rate applied to consignments cleared under CT-3 certificate. The appellant contended that the higher duty rate mentioned in the certificate was erroneous, and Rule 173N mandated payment of duty leviable for the consignment. The Tribunal upheld the appellant's argument, noting that the duty payable was based on the failure to produce the warehousing certificate. The appellant was required to pay duty at the concessional/exempted rate only on the consignments cleared against CT-3. The total duty payable was determined, and the Tribunal confirmed a specific amount while setting aside the rest of the duty demand, penalty, and interest.In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal partly, confirming a reduced duty demand while setting aside other components of the demand. The judgment clarified the entitlement to exemption under notification No. 9/2000 and the correct application of duty rates on consignments cleared under CT-3 certificate, providing a detailed analysis of the legal provisions and factual circumstances involved in the case.