<?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>2012 (10) TMI 652 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217714</link>
    <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the appellants, a manufacturer-exporter and a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU), in a case concerning Duty Drawback benefits. The Court held that the location of manufacturing (whether in an EOU or not) is immaterial as long as the goods are manufactured in India and exported. It found that exporters are entitled to Duty Drawback at the All Industry rate unless they opt for a higher Brand Rate Drawback rate, deeming departmental circulars mandating the Brand Rate for EOUs as contrary to statutory provisions. The Court emphasized the purpose of Duty Drawback in incentivizing exporters and reinstated the Duty Drawback claims of the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Oct 2012 23:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=191089" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 652 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217714</link>
      <description>The High Court ruled in favor of the appellants, a manufacturer-exporter and a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU), in a case concerning Duty Drawback benefits. The Court held that the location of manufacturing (whether in an EOU or not) is immaterial as long as the goods are manufactured in India and exported. It found that exporters are entitled to Duty Drawback at the All Industry rate unless they opt for a higher Brand Rate Drawback rate, deeming departmental circulars mandating the Brand Rate for EOUs as contrary to statutory provisions. The Court emphasized the purpose of Duty Drawback in incentivizing exporters and reinstated the Duty Drawback claims of the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217714</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>