<?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>2015 (10) TMI 329 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265054</link>
    <description>Bona fide transferees of transferable DEPB/DFIA scrips are described as entitled to customs exemption where they purchased the instruments for value without notice of fraud, even if the original scrips were later cancelled ab initio. The note states that a licence procured by fraud remains effective until avoided in law, and that transferees who complied with the transfer and use requirements could not be denied duty benefit on the basis of the exporter&#039;s later fraud. It further records that duty demand, confiscation, interest and penalties were not sustainable against such transferees, and that prior recovery or settlement with the original exporters did not justify a further demand from the importers.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2015 06:02:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=400103" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (10) TMI 329 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265054</link>
      <description>Bona fide transferees of transferable DEPB/DFIA scrips are described as entitled to customs exemption where they purchased the instruments for value without notice of fraud, even if the original scrips were later cancelled ab initio. The note states that a licence procured by fraud remains effective until avoided in law, and that transferees who complied with the transfer and use requirements could not be denied duty benefit on the basis of the exporter&#039;s later fraud. It further records that duty demand, confiscation, interest and penalties were not sustainable against such transferees, and that prior recovery or settlement with the original exporters did not justify a further demand from the importers.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=265054</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>