Condonation of Delay: directoral disputes and pending company proceedings can constitute reasonable cause, allowing a belated return to be treated as ...
Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
The exemption under Notification No. 21/2002 could not be denied merely because the importer did not re-export the goods within the date mentioned in the DGH certificate, as the notification itself imposed no such time-bound condition. The Tribunal held that Condition No. 29 only required a DGH certificate confirming that the goods were needed for petroleum operations and imported under the relevant licence or mining lease; any additional re-export stipulation in the certificate could not override the notification. It further applied its earlier ruling that clearance to an SEZ unit after use amounts to export under the SEZ Act. The demand of duty, interest and penalty was therefore unsustainable and was set aside.
The exemption under Notification No. 21/2002 could not be denied merely because the importer did not re-export the goods within the date mentioned in the DGH certificate, as the notification itself imposed no such time-bound condition. The Tribunal held that Condition No. 29 only required a DGH certificate confirming that the goods were needed for petroleum operations and imported under the relevant licence or mining lease; any additional re-export stipulation in the certificate could not override the notification. It further applied its earlier ruling that clearance to an SEZ unit after use amounts to export under the SEZ Act. The demand of duty, interest and penalty was therefore unsustainable and was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.