<?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 (11) TMI 793 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239616</link>
    <description>The exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. could not be denied where imported oil well equipment was supported by the required Directorate General of Hydrocarbons certificate and was used for the permitted petroleum operations. Although the goods were later supplied to a Special Economic Zone instead of being physically re-exported, that supply was treated as export under the SEZ Act, 2005. Because the notification did not impose an express re-export condition and the SEZ Act gives overriding effect to its export treatment, the exemption conditions were held satisfied and the demand, confiscation and penalties were unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2016 11:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=335977" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 793 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239616</link>
      <description>The exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. could not be denied where imported oil well equipment was supported by the required Directorate General of Hydrocarbons certificate and was used for the permitted petroleum operations. Although the goods were later supplied to a Special Economic Zone instead of being physically re-exported, that supply was treated as export under the SEZ Act, 2005. Because the notification did not impose an express re-export condition and the SEZ Act gives overriding effect to its export treatment, the exemption conditions were held satisfied and the demand, confiscation and penalties were unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239616</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>