<?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>2011 (6) TMI 276 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207252</link>
    <description>Conditional customs exemption for an imported helicopter depended on a post-import undertaking to use it only for authorised non-scheduled passenger services. Exclusive charter-hire use for transporting personnel of third-party companies was treated as private, non-public use and did not meet the permitted passenger or charter-service categories; the customs duty, CVD and related SAD exemptions therefore failed. Customs could independently verify compliance with the exemption condition notwithstanding the DGCA permit or unproved DGCA clarifications. The duty demand was not time-barred because it arose from breach of the undertaking. Import without the required DGFT licence and use contrary to exemption conditions supported confiscation and penalties for deliberate non-compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2011 21:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=180731" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (6) TMI 276 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207252</link>
      <description>Conditional customs exemption for an imported helicopter depended on a post-import undertaking to use it only for authorised non-scheduled passenger services. Exclusive charter-hire use for transporting personnel of third-party companies was treated as private, non-public use and did not meet the permitted passenger or charter-service categories; the customs duty, CVD and related SAD exemptions therefore failed. Customs could independently verify compliance with the exemption condition notwithstanding the DGCA permit or unproved DGCA clarifications. The duty demand was not time-barred because it arose from breach of the undertaking. Import without the required DGFT licence and use contrary to exemption conditions supported confiscation and penalties for deliberate non-compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207252</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>