<?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>2013 (10) TMI 951 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238496</link>
    <description>A de-bonded unit under an export-obligation notification may be subject to two distinct duty consequences: duty with interest where the positive Net Foreign Exchange Earning obligation is not met, and a separate depreciation-based duty mechanism for clearance of capital goods on closure or de-bonding. The interpretation that only the export-obligation condition applied was rejected because it would make the depreciation-linked clause ineffective. On that reading, the Department&#039;s construction of the notification was treated as prima facie correct, and the Revenue was found to have established a strong prima facie case for stay of the refund order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Oct 2013 11:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=333267" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (10) TMI 951 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238496</link>
      <description>A de-bonded unit under an export-obligation notification may be subject to two distinct duty consequences: duty with interest where the positive Net Foreign Exchange Earning obligation is not met, and a separate depreciation-based duty mechanism for clearance of capital goods on closure or de-bonding. The interpretation that only the export-obligation condition applied was rejected because it would make the depreciation-linked clause ineffective. On that reading, the Department&#039;s construction of the notification was treated as prima facie correct, and the Revenue was found to have established a strong prima facie case for stay of the refund order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=238496</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>