<?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>2010 (3) TMI 961 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152725</link>
    <description>Credit on inputs received from a 100% EOU is to be determined by comparing the duty actually paid by the EOU with the additional customs duty leviable on like imported goods; the recipient is entitled only to the lesser amount, and the credit cannot be restricted to one component of the duty merely because an exemption notification was used. Electrical appliances cleared under an end-use based exemption were held not exempt per se, but the demand was unsustainable as time-barred where the department already knew of the clearances through periodic returns. The penalty consequently did not survive and consequential relief followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Jul 2013 14:58:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=169762" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (3) TMI 961 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152725</link>
      <description>Credit on inputs received from a 100% EOU is to be determined by comparing the duty actually paid by the EOU with the additional customs duty leviable on like imported goods; the recipient is entitled only to the lesser amount, and the credit cannot be restricted to one component of the duty merely because an exemption notification was used. Electrical appliances cleared under an end-use based exemption were held not exempt per se, but the demand was unsustainable as time-barred where the department already knew of the clearances through periodic returns. The penalty consequently did not survive and consequential relief followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=152725</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>