<?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 739 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217801</link>
    <description>Later monetary-limit circulars were treated as administrative guidelines and not applied retrospectively to appeals already filed, so the maintainability objection was rejected. Gold findings were treated as parts of jewellery and therefore outside Notification No. 62/2004-Cus., while gold mountings, having the essential character of unfinished jewellery under Rule 2(a) of the General Rules for Interpretation, were also classifiable as gold jewellery and not covered by the exemption. Board circulars could not enlarge the scope of the statutory notification beyond its plain terms, so the exemption granted by the Commissioner was unsustainable and the duty demand with interest was restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Sep 2012 12:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=191175" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 739 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217801</link>
      <description>Later monetary-limit circulars were treated as administrative guidelines and not applied retrospectively to appeals already filed, so the maintainability objection was rejected. Gold findings were treated as parts of jewellery and therefore outside Notification No. 62/2004-Cus., while gold mountings, having the essential character of unfinished jewellery under Rule 2(a) of the General Rules for Interpretation, were also classifiable as gold jewellery and not covered by the exemption. Board circulars could not enlarge the scope of the statutory notification beyond its plain terms, so the exemption granted by the Commissioner was unsustainable and the duty demand with interest was restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217801</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>