https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82598 Exports by a supporting manufacturer were relevant to the appellants' DEEC export obligation, because the advance licence application disclosed the manufacturer as the place of production and the licensing authority had indicated willingness to endorse the DEEC book as third party exports. The impugned order was passed without considering these material facts and without allowing the appellants an opportunity to obtain the necessary endorsement, amounting to non-application of mind. The order was set aside and the matter remanded for de novo adjudication after permitting endorsement of the DEEC book. en-us Fri, 30 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Jul 2011 12:22:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82598 Exports by a supporting manufacturer were relevant to the appellants' DEEC export obligation, because the advance licence application disclosed the manufacturer as the place of production and the licensing authority had indicated willingness to endorse the DEEC book as third party exports. The impugned order was passed without considering these material facts and without allowing the appellants an opportunity to obtain the necessary endorsement, amounting to non-application of mind. The order was set aside and the matter remanded for de novo adjudication after permitting endorsement of the DEEC book. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 30 Apr 1993 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=82598