TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Revenue's view that unlocking exported phones is 'taken into use' under proviso to Rule 3(1) and Section 75 rejected</h1> <h3>Union of India & Ors. Versus M/s. Aims Retail Services Private Limited</h3> The SC dismissed the special leave petition and upheld the HC order, rejecting the Revenue's contention that unlocking/activation of exported mobile ... Disentitlement from claiming duty drawback on export of the said mobile phones under Section 75 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 - unlocking mobile phones after they are manufactured - case of Revenue is that the process of unlocking/activating the said mobile phones would be hit by the proviso to Rule 3(1) of Duty Drawback Rules - it was held by High Court that 'The unlocking/activation of the mobile phone merely makes the mobile phone more usable in the destination country and the same would therefore not constitute “taken into use” under proviso to Rule 3 of Duty Drawback Rules.' HELD THAT:- There are no good reason to interfere with the common impugned order passed by the High Court. SLP dismissed. Supreme Court recorded that 'delay condoned.' After hearing counsel and 'having gone through the materials on record,' the Court found 'no good reason to interfere with the common impugned order passed by the High Court.' Consequently the Special Leave Petitions were 'dismissed.' All pending applications stand disposed of. The decision is procedural and appellate: the Court declined interference with the High Court's impugned order on the basis of the record and submissions, resulting in summary dismissal of the appeals.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
