<?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 (12) TMI 408 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204175</link>
    <description>Duty on shrimp clearances into the domestic tariff area had to be tested under the excise law applicable to the relevant period, and where no excise liability existed for the local-market clearances, the demand could not stand despite absence of Development Commissioner permission. The demand on paddle wheel aerators and diesel generator sets required fresh quantification and reconsideration because depreciation up to the date of duty payment had not been properly applied and a material plea that the aerators were available in the premises was not clearly decided. In consequence, the department&#039;s challenge did not survive after remand and became infructuous.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Jul 2011 11:51:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177719" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 408 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204175</link>
      <description>Duty on shrimp clearances into the domestic tariff area had to be tested under the excise law applicable to the relevant period, and where no excise liability existed for the local-market clearances, the demand could not stand despite absence of Development Commissioner permission. The demand on paddle wheel aerators and diesel generator sets required fresh quantification and reconsideration because depreciation up to the date of duty payment had not been properly applied and a material plea that the aerators were available in the premises was not clearly decided. In consequence, the department&#039;s challenge did not survive after remand and became infructuous.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204175</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>