<?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>2001 (8) TMI 430 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97235</link>
    <description>An export-oriented unit in an export processing zone could invoke Paragraph 94 of the Import Policy only for goods actually required for manufacture, production or processing, and only if they were not prohibited items in the negative list. Because the importer did not take the consumer goods to the zone for such use and instead diverted them to the open market, the claimed import-policy benefit was unavailable and confiscation was sustained. The importer&#039;s early assertion of the claim and delay in clearance did not extend the exemption, but they justified relief on penalties, so the penalty was set aside and the redemption fine was reduced.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Jan 2012 10:26:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=134293" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (8) TMI 430 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97235</link>
      <description>An export-oriented unit in an export processing zone could invoke Paragraph 94 of the Import Policy only for goods actually required for manufacture, production or processing, and only if they were not prohibited items in the negative list. Because the importer did not take the consumer goods to the zone for such use and instead diverted them to the open market, the claimed import-policy benefit was unavailable and confiscation was sustained. The importer&#039;s early assertion of the claim and delay in clearance did not extend the exemption, but they justified relief on penalties, so the penalty was set aside and the redemption fine was reduced.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Aug 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=97235</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>