<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1996 (4) TMI 301 - CEGAT, MUMBAI-I</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85623</link>
    <description>Export-based exclusion under an exemption notification was available only where the manufacturer proved that clearances from the factory were made for export and could be directly correlated with the goods ultimately exported. Goods first removed for home consumption and later exported by purchasers or export houses did not satisfy that requirement, because the manufacturer was not the exporter and the documents did not establish the necessary link between clearance and export. On that reasoning, such clearances could not be excluded from aggregate clearances for exemption purposes, and duty liability remained attached to them.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 06 Aug 2011 12:25:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=122690" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (4) TMI 301 - CEGAT, MUMBAI-I</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85623</link>
      <description>Export-based exclusion under an exemption notification was available only where the manufacturer proved that clearances from the factory were made for export and could be directly correlated with the goods ultimately exported. Goods first removed for home consumption and later exported by purchasers or export houses did not satisfy that requirement, because the manufacturer was not the exporter and the documents did not establish the necessary link between clearance and export. On that reasoning, such clearances could not be excluded from aggregate clearances for exemption purposes, and duty liability remained attached to them.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Apr 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=85623</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>