<?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 (1) TMI 480 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118996</link>
    <description>Where the substantive conditions of the customs exemption notifications were satisfied, later production of the required certificate with the refund claim was accepted as sufficient compliance, and the earlier non-production at clearance was treated as a procedural irregularity not defeating exemption. The Tribunal also noted that the refund claim was examined on the basis of the subsequently produced certificate rather than by reopening the assessment, and the finding on unjust enrichment supported grant of refund.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 07 Jul 2012 13:09:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=155993" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (1) TMI 480 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118996</link>
      <description>Where the substantive conditions of the customs exemption notifications were satisfied, later production of the required certificate with the refund claim was accepted as sufficient compliance, and the earlier non-production at clearance was treated as a procedural irregularity not defeating exemption. The Tribunal also noted that the refund claim was examined on the basis of the subsequently produced certificate rather than by reopening the assessment, and the finding on unjust enrichment supported grant of refund.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118996</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>