<?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>2014 (1) TMI 790 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242573</link>
    <description>Compliance with the end-use condition in a customs exemption notification required verification of whether end-use certification had been properly pursued and issued through the jurisdictional officer. The importer had produced the certificate for part of the goods and had caused applications to be made by the buyers for the remaining quantity, so non-issuance could not be treated as a failure attributable to the importer without examining the certification record. The demand, confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were therefore not sustainable on the existing record, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after verification of the buyers&#039; applications and the status of end-use certification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Jan 2014 10:36:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=342967" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 790 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242573</link>
      <description>Compliance with the end-use condition in a customs exemption notification required verification of whether end-use certification had been properly pursued and issued through the jurisdictional officer. The importer had produced the certificate for part of the goods and had caused applications to be made by the buyers for the remaining quantity, so non-issuance could not be treated as a failure attributable to the importer without examining the certification record. The demand, confiscation, redemption fine and penalty were therefore not sustainable on the existing record, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after verification of the buyers&#039; applications and the status of end-use certification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242573</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>