Just a moment...

Top
FeedbackReport
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Feedback/Report an Error
Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
+ Post a Query
Post a New Query
Title :
0/200 char
Description :
Max 0 char
Category :
Delete Reply

Are you sure you want to delete your reply beginning with '' ?

Delete Issue

Are you sure you want to delete your Issue titled: '' ?

Discussion Forum

Back

All Issues

Advanced Search
Reset Filters
Search By:
Search by Text :
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms
Select Date:
FromTo
Category :
OR
Search by Issue ID:
NOTE: If you have inputs in both the fields, then results will be shown for issueId first.
Issue ID :

GOODS EXPORTED UNDER LUT, PROOF OF EXPORT SUBMITTED. BRC AWAITED.

Anil Gagneja

WE HAVE EXPORTED THE GOODS UNDER LUT AND FILED THE PROOF OF EXPORT WITH RELEVANT EXPORT DOCUMENTS WITHOUT BRC.

KINDLY CONFIRM BRC IS MANDATORY REQUIREMENT OF PROOF OF EXPORT OR NOT.

BRC Not Mandatory for Proving Export Under LUT; ARE-1, Shipping Bills, and Invoices Sufficient for Excise Authorities A discussion on a forum addressed whether a Bank Realization Certificate (BRC) is mandatory for proving export under a Letter of Undertaking (LUT). Multiple contributors agreed that BRC is not necessary for submitting proof of export to excise authorities, as documents like ARE-1, shipping bills, and invoices suffice. However, BRC is important for completing the export process and may be required by other departments like DGFT and RBI for financial verification and audits. Some contributors emphasized the importance of BRC for ensuring compliance with regulations and for future audits, despite it not being immediately necessary for excise purposes. (AI Summary)
answers
Sort by
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
+ Add A New Reply
Hide
Recent Issues