<?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>2006 (2) TMI 359 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117449</link>
    <description>In a waiver-of-predeposit dispute under Customs Notification No. 32/97-Cus., the tribunal considered whether availing DEPB credit and duty drawback on exports made from duty-free imported raw materials for job work amounted to a breach of the notification. Board circulars on wrong availment of DEPB benefit and duty drawback in similar situations were treated as prima facie clarificatory, while the jurisdictional challenge under the 1996 concessional import rules was not examined at the stay stage. The tribunal found the issue contentious and noted the absence of financial hardship, so complete waiver was refused and a pre-deposit was directed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Jun 2012 17:11:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154446" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 359 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117449</link>
      <description>In a waiver-of-predeposit dispute under Customs Notification No. 32/97-Cus., the tribunal considered whether availing DEPB credit and duty drawback on exports made from duty-free imported raw materials for job work amounted to a breach of the notification. Board circulars on wrong availment of DEPB benefit and duty drawback in similar situations were treated as prima facie clarificatory, while the jurisdictional challenge under the 1996 concessional import rules was not examined at the stay stage. The tribunal found the issue contentious and noted the absence of financial hardship, so complete waiver was refused and a pre-deposit was directed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117449</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>