<?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 478 - CESTAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115015</link>
    <description>Duty-paid returned defective goods under Rule 173H must be identifiable as the same returned goods, properly recorded, and retained or cleared within the permitted period unless permission is obtained. Failure to establish identity, provide required intimation or authorisation, and account for goods in statutory records can support confiscation and duty liability. Small scale exemption depends on whether the relevant brand name belongs to the manufacturer rather than a third party. Where an earlier Tribunal determination recognises the brand name as belonging to the manufacturer and remains undisplaced, exemption cannot be denied on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 10:22:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=152014" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (1) TMI 478 - CESTAT,  NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115015</link>
      <description>Duty-paid returned defective goods under Rule 173H must be identifiable as the same returned goods, properly recorded, and retained or cleared within the permitted period unless permission is obtained. Failure to establish identity, provide required intimation or authorisation, and account for goods in statutory records can support confiscation and duty liability. Small scale exemption depends on whether the relevant brand name belongs to the manufacturer rather than a third party. Where an earlier Tribunal determination recognises the brand name as belonging to the manufacturer and remains undisplaced, exemption cannot be denied on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jan 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=115015</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>