<?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 (12) TMI 578 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269274</link>
    <description>Refund of Special Additional Duty by re-credit in licences or scrips was held admissible where the re-credit and utilisation were completed within the extended time permitted by departmental circulars, and the claims satisfied Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. The exemption notification conferred a substantive entitlement that could not be curtailed by circular instructions, while the circulars could regulate only procedure. The sanction of refund by way of re-credit was therefore proper, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Dec 2015 11:08:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=408743" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 578 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269274</link>
      <description>Refund of Special Additional Duty by re-credit in licences or scrips was held admissible where the re-credit and utilisation were completed within the extended time permitted by departmental circulars, and the claims satisfied Notification No. 102/2007-Cus. The exemption notification conferred a substantive entitlement that could not be curtailed by circular instructions, while the circulars could regulate only procedure. The sanction of refund by way of re-credit was therefore proper, and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=269274</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>