<?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 (3) TMI 741 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245293</link>
    <description>For a 100% EOU, deemed exports must be included in the FOB value used to compute the permissible limit for DTA clearances under the EXIM Policy. The Tribunal treated this position as already settled by earlier decisions, including a view that had remained undisturbed in further challenge, and applied that settled interpretation to the present dispute. On that basis, a duty demand founded on exclusion of deemed exports from the clearance computation could not be sustained, and the assessee&#039;s position prevailed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 26 Mar 2014 08:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=349786" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 741 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245293</link>
      <description>For a 100% EOU, deemed exports must be included in the FOB value used to compute the permissible limit for DTA clearances under the EXIM Policy. The Tribunal treated this position as already settled by earlier decisions, including a view that had remained undisturbed in further challenge, and applied that settled interpretation to the present dispute. On that basis, a duty demand founded on exclusion of deemed exports from the clearance computation could not be sustained, and the assessee&#039;s position prevailed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245293</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>