<?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 (8) TMI 396 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119857</link>
    <description>Duty-free imports under Notification No. 53/97-Cus. were linked to an export obligation, and the interim relief turned on whether a prima facie case existed for unconditional waiver of pre-deposit. The record showed statements admitting that the finished goods were not exported but diverted to the local market, with corroboration from records; retraction at the stay stage did not dislodge that material, and no evidence was produced to show use of the imported fabrics in exported goods. Partial waiver was therefore granted only to the extent of 50% of the confirmed duties, with stay limited accordingly. A co-applicant was given unconditional stay because no sufficient material of his involvement or abetment was shown at the interim stage.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2012 16:14:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=156853" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (8) TMI 396 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119857</link>
      <description>Duty-free imports under Notification No. 53/97-Cus. were linked to an export obligation, and the interim relief turned on whether a prima facie case existed for unconditional waiver of pre-deposit. The record showed statements admitting that the finished goods were not exported but diverted to the local market, with corroboration from records; retraction at the stay stage did not dislodge that material, and no evidence was produced to show use of the imported fabrics in exported goods. Partial waiver was therefore granted only to the extent of 50% of the confirmed duties, with stay limited accordingly. A co-applicant was given unconditional stay because no sufficient material of his involvement or abetment was shown at the interim stage.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>