<?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>1998 (4) TMI 276 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89017</link>
    <description>Customs duty demand under Section 28 was unsustainable where the show cause notice alleged breach of Notification No. 123/81-C.E., but the imported spectrometer had been assessed and cleared under Notification No. 13/81-Cus. granting exemption for capital goods used in 100% export oriented undertakings. Because the notice did not allege violation of the customs exemption actually applied at clearance, the demand could not be supported on that basis and the exemption remained effective.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Sep 2011 18:11:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126080" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (4) TMI 276 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89017</link>
      <description>Customs duty demand under Section 28 was unsustainable where the show cause notice alleged breach of Notification No. 123/81-C.E., but the imported spectrometer had been assessed and cleared under Notification No. 13/81-Cus. granting exemption for capital goods used in 100% export oriented undertakings. Because the notice did not allege violation of the customs exemption actually applied at clearance, the demand could not be supported on that basis and the exemption remained effective.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89017</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>