<?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 (6) TMI 680 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170227</link>
    <description>The court allowed the appeals by a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) concerning the applicable rate of duty on clearances to the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA). It held that the Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) should be computed as per Notification No. 29/2004-C.E. and that the benefit of Notification No. 31/2004-C.E. is available for computing Additional Duties of Customs. The appellant must prove that goods cleared in DTA were manufactured from raw materials produced or manufactured in India to avail lower duty rates under Notification No. 23/2003-C.E. The case was remanded for the original authority to re-examine the evidence and recompute the demand accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 May 2015 14:47:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=385601" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (6) TMI 680 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170227</link>
      <description>The court allowed the appeals by a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) concerning the applicable rate of duty on clearances to the Domestic Tariff Area (DTA). It held that the Additional Duty of Customs (CVD) should be computed as per Notification No. 29/2004-C.E. and that the benefit of Notification No. 31/2004-C.E. is available for computing Additional Duties of Customs. The appellant must prove that goods cleared in DTA were manufactured from raw materials produced or manufactured in India to avail lower duty rates under Notification No. 23/2003-C.E. The case was remanded for the original authority to re-examine the evidence and recompute the demand accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 21 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=170227</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>