<?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>2004 (6) TMI 542 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113951</link>
    <description>Cut tobacco duty credit under the export-linked set-off scheme was available when issued for manufacture and could be used against duty on cigarettes cleared for home consumption. For cigarettes returned for reprocessing after export clearance, duty on the relevant input had already been recovered at the reprocessing stage, so the same amount could not be demanded again by debiting the set-off account. Cigarettes that never left stock were outside the proviso governing goods exported under bond, so that proviso could not be used to deny credit merely because export proof was not produced. The proper consequence for non-export, if any, was recovery for breach of bond conditions, not disallowance of otherwise permissible credit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 May 2012 13:42:01 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=150957" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (6) TMI 542 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113951</link>
      <description>Cut tobacco duty credit under the export-linked set-off scheme was available when issued for manufacture and could be used against duty on cigarettes cleared for home consumption. For cigarettes returned for reprocessing after export clearance, duty on the relevant input had already been recovered at the reprocessing stage, so the same amount could not be demanded again by debiting the set-off account. Cigarettes that never left stock were outside the proviso governing goods exported under bond, so that proviso could not be used to deny credit merely because export proof was not produced. The proper consequence for non-export, if any, was recovery for breach of bond conditions, not disallowance of otherwise permissible credit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=113951</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>