<?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>2005 (1) TMI 437 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114868</link>
    <description>A customs exemption under Notification No. 51/96-Cus. was available only if the institution was registered with the prescribed authority on the date of import. Because registration was obtained only after import, the condition precedent was not satisfied and the benefit could not be extended retrospectively. The notification contained no express provision allowing later registration to cure the defect. Accordingly, the exemption claim failed for want of registration on the import date.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 17:24:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=151867" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (1) TMI 437 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114868</link>
      <description>A customs exemption under Notification No. 51/96-Cus. was available only if the institution was registered with the prescribed authority on the date of import. Because registration was obtained only after import, the condition precedent was not satisfied and the benefit could not be extended retrospectively. The notification contained no express provision allowing later registration to cure the defect. Accordingly, the exemption claim failed for want of registration on the import date.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114868</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>