<?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>2009 (6) TMI 736 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126224</link>
    <description>An exemption notification requiring actual use of imported material in the manufacture of export goods was treated as condition-specific, and the applicants failed to show a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit on the duty demand because the imported polyester filament yarn was not fully used in the export product. The cited authorities were distinguished on the basis of different notification wording. Interim protection was, however, granted in relation to the penalty demand, with the matter balanced on the facts and Revenue&#039;s interest. The duty demand remained payable with interest, while stay was confined to penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Nov 2012 14:31:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=163121" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 736 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126224</link>
      <description>An exemption notification requiring actual use of imported material in the manufacture of export goods was treated as condition-specific, and the applicants failed to show a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit on the duty demand because the imported polyester filament yarn was not fully used in the export product. The cited authorities were distinguished on the basis of different notification wording. Interim protection was, however, granted in relation to the penalty demand, with the matter balanced on the facts and Revenue&#039;s interest. The duty demand remained payable with interest, while stay was confined to penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=126224</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>