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>EOUs Eligible for DTA Clearance Based on Deemed Exports - Tribunal Upholds Development Commissioner's Authority</h1> The Tribunal held that 100% Export Oriented Units (EOUs) can be eligible for clearance in the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) based on deemed exports, not just ... EXIM Policy - 100% EOU Issues involved: Interpretation of whether only actual or physical exports should be considered for clearance in Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) by 100% Export Oriented Units (EOUs) under relevant notifications.Summary:The case involved an appeal by a 100% EOU engaged in manufacturing crimped/texturised yarn, seeking clearance in the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) under specific notifications. The dispute arose when the department questioned the eligibility of the unit for DTA clearance due to alleged lack of physical exports. Three show cause notices were issued proposing duty recovery and penalties. The main issue was whether only actual exports or even deemed exports could be considered for DTA clearance.The Tribunal, considering the case of Ginni International Ltd. v. CCE, Jaipur, held that once an EOU has permission to sell goods in DTA as per Exim Policy, the government cannot dispute the value of clearance approved by the competent authority, in this case, the Development Commissioner. The Tribunal emphasized that the Revenue cannot challenge the clearance value authorized by the Development Commissioner, and the duty demand cannot be solely based on FOB value of physical exports. The Tribunal cited previous cases to support this view, emphasizing the authority of the Development Commissioner in permitting DTA sales. The Tribunal concluded that the Revenue cannot question the value of clearance allowed by the competent authority and set aside the duty demand, allowing the appeals.The Tribunal's decision was influenced by previous cases such as Cadilac Textiles Ltd. v. CCE & C, Surat and Virlon Textile Mills v. CCE, Mumbai-III, where similar views were upheld. The Tribunal, based on these precedents, set aside the duty demand and allowed the appeals, emphasizing the authority of the Development Commissioner in permitting DTA sales for 100% EOUs.