https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114941 Nil customs duty under Notification No. 26/2000-Cus. for specified Sri Lankan-origin goods could not be denied merely because of Circular No. 73/2003-Cus. The exemption continued to operate on the date of import, and its availability depended on proof of origin through the prescribed certificate to the satisfaction of customs. The circular expressed departmental concern over rising copper imports, but it did not rescind the notification or create a specific legal prohibition against the imported copper rectangular strip. In the absence of withdrawal of the notification or exclusion of the goods from its scope, denial of the exemption was unsustainable. en-us Thu, 13 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 May 2012 15:11:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114941 Nil customs duty under Notification No. 26/2000-Cus. for specified Sri Lankan-origin goods could not be denied merely because of Circular No. 73/2003-Cus. The exemption continued to operate on the date of import, and its availability depended on proof of origin through the prescribed certificate to the satisfaction of customs. The circular expressed departmental concern over rising copper imports, but it did not rescind the notification or create a specific legal prohibition against the imported copper rectangular strip. In the absence of withdrawal of the notification or exclusion of the goods from its scope, denial of the exemption was unsustainable. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 13 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=114941