Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
100% EOU - Joint filing of import documents by the EOU / EPZ unit and the domestic leasing company - The appellant cannot be faulted if the EDI system did not permit a joint filing of the import documents. Revenue has not disputed the appellants claim. - The appellant-EOU imported the impugned goods they would have been eligible for the exemption. Similarly, if Amul had jointly filed a Bill of Entry and executed a bond along with the appellant, they (Amul) too would have been eligible for the exemption. - Benefit of exemption allowed - AT
100% EOU - Joint filing of import documents by the EOU / EPZ unit and the domestic leasing company - The appellant cannot be faulted if the EDI system did not permit a joint filing of the import documents. Revenue has not disputed the appellants claim. - The appellant-EOU imported the impugned goods they would have been eligible for the exemption. Similarly, if Amul had jointly filed a Bill of Entry and executed a bond along with the appellant, they (Amul) too would have been eligible for the exemption. - Benefit of exemption allowed - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.