<?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>2007 (2) TMI 18 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1252</link>
    <description>Under the credit certificate scheme, duty-free import of eligible goods could not be denied by reading into the notification or certificate an additional nexus requirement between the imported machine and the services rendered. The governing instruments did not impose a negative-list restriction or any separate nexus condition, and a departmental clarification could not add a limitation absent from the scheme. On the facts, the machine was used in the appellant&#039;s service operations, and the adverse nexus finding rested on a misunderstanding of the appellant&#039;s communication. The import therefore remained entitled to the scheme benefit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 15:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40664" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 18 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1252</link>
      <description>Under the credit certificate scheme, duty-free import of eligible goods could not be denied by reading into the notification or certificate an additional nexus requirement between the imported machine and the services rendered. The governing instruments did not impose a negative-list restriction or any separate nexus condition, and a departmental clarification could not add a limitation absent from the scheme. On the facts, the machine was used in the appellant&#039;s service operations, and the adverse nexus finding rested on a misunderstanding of the appellant&#039;s communication. The import therefore remained entitled to the scheme benefit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1252</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>