<?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>2007 (2) TMI 406 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120950</link>
    <description>An exemption notification under the Target Plus Scheme allowing debit of the duty leviable &quot;but for&quot; exemption was interpreted to mean the duty actually recoverable on import under the operative exemption regime, not the unadjusted tariff rate. Because the goods were also covered by a notification prescribing an effective Basic Customs Duty rate of 5%, that effective rate governed the debit computation. Debiting duty at the effective rate was therefore not treated as conferring any double benefit, and the claim to compute debit on that basis was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jul 2012 15:42:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=157944" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 406 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120950</link>
      <description>An exemption notification under the Target Plus Scheme allowing debit of the duty leviable &quot;but for&quot; exemption was interpreted to mean the duty actually recoverable on import under the operative exemption regime, not the unadjusted tariff rate. Because the goods were also covered by a notification prescribing an effective Basic Customs Duty rate of 5%, that effective rate governed the debit computation. Debiting duty at the effective rate was therefore not treated as conferring any double benefit, and the claim to compute debit on that basis was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=120950</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>