https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246221 The case involved allegations of contravention of Letter of Permission (LOP) conditions by the appellant in exporting needles without permission. Customs Import Duty and Central Excise duty were demanded initially. After multiple adjudications and appeals, the final decision held that the export of needles was not covered under the LOP, thus not liable for duty. The case was remanded for further consideration to reconcile certain aspects, emphasizing the need for fact-finding to determine the limitation issue. en-us Wed, 06 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Apr 2014 11:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246221 The case involved allegations of contravention of Letter of Permission (LOP) conditions by the appellant in exporting needles without permission. Customs Import Duty and Central Excise duty were demanded initially. After multiple adjudications and appeals, the final decision held that the export of needles was not covered under the LOP, thus not liable for duty. The case was remanded for further consideration to reconcile certain aspects, emphasizing the need for fact-finding to determine the limitation issue. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 06 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=246221