<?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 (11) TMI 457 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100903</link>
    <description>Imported goods duly declared for clearance as cargo for a 100% EOU were not to be treated as baggage goods merely because of the mode of arrival. The applicable EOU policy provisions, rather than paragraph 5.6 of the EXIM Policy, governed the import because the record showed a cargo clearance claim and the scheme allowed receipt of raw material without duty. On that basis, paragraph 5.6 was held inapplicable and the matter was remitted for fresh processing under the EOU framework.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 16:43:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=137953" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (11) TMI 457 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100903</link>
      <description>Imported goods duly declared for clearance as cargo for a 100% EOU were not to be treated as baggage goods merely because of the mode of arrival. The applicable EOU policy provisions, rather than paragraph 5.6 of the EXIM Policy, governed the import because the record showed a cargo clearance claim and the scheme allowed receipt of raw material without duty. On that basis, paragraph 5.6 was held inapplicable and the matter was remitted for fresh processing under the EOU framework.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Nov 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100903</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>