<?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>1997 (5) TMI 193 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86984</link>
    <description>A transferable import licence validly issued after discharge of the export obligation supported duty-free clearance under Notification No. 80 of 1995, and Customs could not insist on fresh proof of a close nexus between the imported inputs and the goods used in the export product. The notification was read with the licensing scheme and contemporaneous departmental materials, and it did not require minute identity or exact matching of quality, specification, or denierage. Once the competent authority had examined and transferred the licence and the imported goods were covered by it, the exemption could not be denied on the ground that nexus had not been re-established.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sun, 25 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Aug 2011 17:06:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=124051" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (5) TMI 193 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86984</link>
      <description>A transferable import licence validly issued after discharge of the export obligation supported duty-free clearance under Notification No. 80 of 1995, and Customs could not insist on fresh proof of a close nexus between the imported inputs and the goods used in the export product. The notification was read with the licensing scheme and contemporaneous departmental materials, and it did not require minute identity or exact matching of quality, specification, or denierage. Once the competent authority had examined and transferred the licence and the imported goods were covered by it, the exemption could not be denied on the ground that nexus had not been re-established.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Sun, 25 May 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=86984</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>