https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270178 The benefit of Notification No. 45/2002-Cus under the DEPB scheme could not be denied to the importer where the allegation of fraudulent procurement of the exporter's DEPB licence through over-invoicing had already been rejected in connected proceedings and that finding had been upheld. Once the foundational allegation failed, the consequential denial of exemption to the importer had no basis. The Tribunal therefore held that the Revenue's challenge to the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order was unsustainable and maintained the relief granted to the importer. en-us Thu, 25 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 Dec 2015 10:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270178 The benefit of Notification No. 45/2002-Cus under the DEPB scheme could not be denied to the importer where the allegation of fraudulent procurement of the exporter's DEPB licence through over-invoicing had already been rejected in connected proceedings and that finding had been upheld. Once the foundational allegation failed, the consequential denial of exemption to the importer had no basis. The Tribunal therefore held that the Revenue's challenge to the Commissioner (Appeals)'s order was unsustainable and maintained the relief granted to the importer. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 25 Jun 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270178