<?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 (3) TMI 288 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89716</link>
    <description>An exemption from customs duty under Notification No. 97/78 was conditioned on re-export of the imported containers within two months, with the bond expressly providing that duty would become payable if re-export did not occur. The arrangement was treated as an express risk allocation, so alleged impossibility of re-export did not void the duty obligation under Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The importer therefore remained liable to pay customs duty, and the demand was sustained in favour of the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 15 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2011 12:14:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=126778" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (3) TMI 288 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89716</link>
      <description>An exemption from customs duty under Notification No. 97/78 was conditioned on re-export of the imported containers within two months, with the bond expressly providing that duty would become payable if re-export did not occur. The arrangement was treated as an express risk allocation, so alleged impossibility of re-export did not void the duty obligation under Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. The importer therefore remained liable to pay customs duty, and the demand was sustained in favour of the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 15 Mar 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=89716</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>