Search and seizure: abatement of earlier search bars use of prior seized material in later search-based assessments; relief limited to new documents f...
Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
Export Obligation Discharge Certificates for EPCG compliance cannot be questioned by Customs unless DGFT adjudicates and cancels them, so demands quas...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6561 to 6580 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Denial of SAFTA preferential treatment arose from questions...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefit
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Denial of SAFTA preferential treatment arose from questions about authenticity and verification of a Country of Origin certificate and classification of imported crude soyabean oil. The Tribunal found the certificate was produced, not rejected as fake, and no conclusive adverse report was obtained from the issuing authority; applying the presumption of genuineness and relevant precedent, the appellant was held entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 99/2011. Consequently the impugned order denying exemption was set aside and the appeal allowed with consequential relief.
Denial of SAFTA preferential treatment arose from questions about authenticity and verification of a Country of Origin certificate and classification of imported crude soyabean oil. The Tribunal found the certificate was produced, not rejected as fake, and no conclusive adverse report was obtained from the issuing authority; applying the presumption of genuineness and relevant precedent, the appellant was held entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 99/2011. Consequently the impugned order denying exemption was set aside and the appeal allowed with consequential relief.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
