<?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>2002 (7) TMI 543 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105670</link>
    <description>DEPB credit was to be computed on FOB value of exports, but capped so it did not exceed 50% of the present market value. The appellate order applying the departmental circular and DGFT clarifications was upheld because those materials expressly prescribed the same cap, leaving no legal infirmity in the computation method. The resulting position favoured the assessee and rejected the Revenue&#039;s challenge to the formula used for DEPB entitlement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Mar 2012 10:38:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=142708" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (7) TMI 543 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105670</link>
      <description>DEPB credit was to be computed on FOB value of exports, but capped so it did not exceed 50% of the present market value. The appellate order applying the departmental circular and DGFT clarifications was upheld because those materials expressly prescribed the same cap, leaving no legal infirmity in the computation method. The resulting position favoured the assessee and rejected the Revenue&#039;s challenge to the formula used for DEPB entitlement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105670</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>