<?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 (5) TMI 275 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88418</link>
    <description>In the absence of an express import policy prohibition or specific restriction, customs authorities must examine each consignment against the REP licence or OGL entry covering that Bill of Entry. Separately imported components and sub-assemblies cannot be refused clearance merely because, when aggregated, they would form complete video cameras in CKD condition. Item-wise licence coverage therefore prevailed, and the confiscation, redemption fine, and duty demand were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Sep 2011 17:11:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=125483" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1996 (5) TMI 275 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88418</link>
      <description>In the absence of an express import policy prohibition or specific restriction, customs authorities must examine each consignment against the REP licence or OGL entry covering that Bill of Entry. Separately imported components and sub-assemblies cannot be refused clearance merely because, when aggregated, they would form complete video cameras in CKD condition. Item-wise licence coverage therefore prevailed, and the confiscation, redemption fine, and duty demand were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 May 1996 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=88418</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>