<?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 (5) TMI 493 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116297</link>
    <description>Duty could not be demanded again on PCB assemblies where the assessee produced certificates and the department failed to properly verify that the goods had already suffered duty; the later demands on the seized goods were therefore unsustainable. For small scale exemption, earlier clearances of two video mappers had to be excluded, which brought aggregate turnover within the exemption limit, and the job-work clearances were also held covered by the applicable exemption procedure. The amount of Rs. 16 lakhs was not treated as additional consideration because permission to use foreign exchange for import was only a transfer of a permit, and in the absence of intent to evade duty, confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2012 11:58:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=153295" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (5) TMI 493 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116297</link>
      <description>Duty could not be demanded again on PCB assemblies where the assessee produced certificates and the department failed to properly verify that the goods had already suffered duty; the later demands on the seized goods were therefore unsustainable. For small scale exemption, earlier clearances of two video mappers had to be excluded, which brought aggregate turnover within the exemption limit, and the job-work clearances were also held covered by the applicable exemption procedure. The amount of Rs. 16 lakhs was not treated as additional consideration because permission to use foreign exchange for import was only a transfer of a permit, and in the absence of intent to evade duty, confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=116297</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>