https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206798 Customs exemption under Notification No. 32/97-Cus. could not be denied merely because drawback was claimed on some shipping bills relating to job-work imports and export after prescribed value addition. The Tribunal treated the imports of unit soles as covered by the notification for manufacture of men's shoes for export, and held that the proper course, if any violation arose, was to deny drawback or DEPB benefits rather than withdraw the customs exemption itself. The denial of exemption was therefore unsustainable, and the assessee remained entitled to the notification benefit. en-us Tue, 26 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Nov 2011 13:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206798 Customs exemption under Notification No. 32/97-Cus. could not be denied merely because drawback was claimed on some shipping bills relating to job-work imports and export after prescribed value addition. The Tribunal treated the imports of unit soles as covered by the notification for manufacture of men's shoes for export, and held that the proper course, if any violation arose, was to deny drawback or DEPB benefits rather than withdraw the customs exemption itself. The denial of exemption was therefore unsustainable, and the assessee remained entitled to the notification benefit. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 26 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206798