<?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 (3) TMI 417 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117742</link>
    <description>A beneficial customs exemption notification was construed harmoniously with its conditions to cover imports made by persons other than the listed institutions, provided the goods were imported for delivery to those institutions. The later amendment and circular were treated as clarificatory of the original exemption scheme, not as creating a new benefit, so they operated retrospectively from the inception of the notification. The term &quot;importer&quot; was read broadly in light of the exemption&#039;s purpose, and a restrictive reading limiting relief only to direct imports by the institutions was rejected as inconsistent with that purpose.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2012 12:53:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=154739" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 417 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117742</link>
      <description>A beneficial customs exemption notification was construed harmoniously with its conditions to cover imports made by persons other than the listed institutions, provided the goods were imported for delivery to those institutions. The later amendment and circular were treated as clarificatory of the original exemption scheme, not as creating a new benefit, so they operated retrospectively from the inception of the notification. The term &quot;importer&quot; was read broadly in light of the exemption&#039;s purpose, and a restrictive reading limiting relief only to direct imports by the institutions was rejected as inconsistent with that purpose.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=117742</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>