<?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 (1) TMI 375 - CEGAT,  CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94163</link>
    <description>Re-imported aluminium alloy extruded products were treated as outside the DEEC exclusion because the scheme&#039;s essential conditions were not fulfilled in substance, despite export under a DEEC shipping bill. The Tribunal accepted that the goods were not exported under the DEEC scheme where the foreign buyer had not taken over the goods and the required foreign exchange remittance conditions were unmet, so Notification No. 97/95-Cus did not bar exemption. It also noted that Notification No. 94/96-Cus provided a separate re-import exemption route, and that the relevant procedural conditions, including prior intimation, were satisfied before clearance from customs custody.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2011 15:29:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=131223" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1997 (1) TMI 375 - CEGAT,  CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94163</link>
      <description>Re-imported aluminium alloy extruded products were treated as outside the DEEC exclusion because the scheme&#039;s essential conditions were not fulfilled in substance, despite export under a DEEC shipping bill. The Tribunal accepted that the goods were not exported under the DEEC scheme where the foreign buyer had not taken over the goods and the required foreign exchange remittance conditions were unmet, so Notification No. 97/95-Cus did not bar exemption. It also noted that Notification No. 94/96-Cus provided a separate re-import exemption route, and that the relevant procedural conditions, including prior intimation, were satisfied before clearance from customs custody.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=94163</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>