Functional comparability governs selection of support-service and IT-enabled service comparables, with verification required for unresolved data and m...
Bank account freezing requires statutory authority; anti-money-laundering compliance and KYC monitoring do not permit unilateral indefinite restrictio...
The appellant, an EOU/EHTP unit, is eligible for exemption under Notification No. 12/2012-Cus at the time of debonding of imported goods. The customs duty should be calculated at the effective rate applicable at the time of debonding. The appellant's procedural compliance by furnishing a bond of Rs. 1000 crores is sufficient for claiming the exemption. The exemption can be claimed at debonding, even if not availed at the time of importation. The demand for duty and interest raised in the impugned order is not justified. The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant is entitled to the exemption benefit under Notification No. 12/2012-Cus at debonding.
The appellant, an EOU/EHTP unit, is eligible for exemption under Notification No. 12/2012-Cus at the time of debonding of imported goods. The customs duty should be calculated at the effective rate applicable at the time of debonding. The appellant's procedural compliance by furnishing a bond of Rs. 1000 crores is sufficient for claiming the exemption. The exemption can be claimed at debonding, even if not availed at the time of importation. The demand for duty and interest raised in the impugned order is not justified. The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that the appellant is entitled to the exemption benefit under Notification No. 12/2012-Cus at debonding.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
