<?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 630 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119497</link>
    <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, a 100% Export-Oriented Unit, regarding the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Customs. The tribunal found a prima facie case in favor of the appellants, granting them waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery for duty and penalty amounts. Additionally, the appellants were deemed entitled to input duty credit from an earlier date, supported by the tribunal&#039;s assessment of their eligibility during the disputed period. The validity of duty demand and penalty imposition was also questioned, with the tribunal ultimately siding with the appellants based on the lack of evidence of irregularities in duty-paid inputs receipt.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:17:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156494" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (3) TMI 630 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119497</link>
      <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, a 100% Export-Oriented Unit, regarding the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Customs. The tribunal found a prima facie case in favor of the appellants, granting them waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery for duty and penalty amounts. Additionally, the appellants were deemed entitled to input duty credit from an earlier date, supported by the tribunal&#039;s assessment of their eligibility during the disputed period. The validity of duty demand and penalty imposition was also questioned, with the tribunal ultimately siding with the appellants based on the lack of evidence of irregularities in duty-paid inputs receipt.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119497</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>