<?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 (11) TMI 347 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204872</link>
    <description>Exemption and concessional-duty notifications must be strictly satisfied, and benefit is unavailable unless every stipulated condition is met. After amendment of Notification No. 210/82-Cus., M/s. Oil and Natural Gas Commission was no longer a specified agency, so the importer could not claim the exemption for goods cleared after that amendment. The concessional rate under Notification No. 513/86-Cus. also failed because the import licence covered high carbon wire or rods, while the imported goods were brass-plated high carbon wires, creating a mismatch that did not satisfy the notification condition. The duty demand was therefore sustained and the appeal dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jun 2011 16:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=178400" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (11) TMI 347 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204872</link>
      <description>Exemption and concessional-duty notifications must be strictly satisfied, and benefit is unavailable unless every stipulated condition is met. After amendment of Notification No. 210/82-Cus., M/s. Oil and Natural Gas Commission was no longer a specified agency, so the importer could not claim the exemption for goods cleared after that amendment. The concessional rate under Notification No. 513/86-Cus. also failed because the import licence covered high carbon wire or rods, while the imported goods were brass-plated high carbon wires, creating a mismatch that did not satisfy the notification condition. The duty demand was therefore sustained and the appeal dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204872</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>