<?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 (4) TMI 948 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154776</link>
    <description>Exemption for helicopters imported under the notification was treated as conditional on compliance with the specified requirements for non-scheduled passenger or charter services. At the stay stage, the Tribunal found the department&#039;s reading prima facie sustainable because the helicopters were on long-term lease, were not shown to be available to the public at large, and the published tariff condition for charter services was absent. The dispute was considered contentious, so penalties were viewed prima facie as unsustainable in part, but full waiver of the duty demand was not granted. On limitation, one set of appeals failed because the demand arose from the bond, while another showed a prima facie limitation bar where no suppression, fraud, or wilful misstatement was alleged.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2013 14:10:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=171807" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (4) TMI 948 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154776</link>
      <description>Exemption for helicopters imported under the notification was treated as conditional on compliance with the specified requirements for non-scheduled passenger or charter services. At the stay stage, the Tribunal found the department&#039;s reading prima facie sustainable because the helicopters were on long-term lease, were not shown to be available to the public at large, and the published tariff condition for charter services was absent. The dispute was considered contentious, so penalties were viewed prima facie as unsustainable in part, but full waiver of the duty demand was not granted. On limitation, one set of appeals failed because the demand arose from the bond, while another showed a prima facie limitation bar where no suppression, fraud, or wilful misstatement was alleged.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154776</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>