<?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 (3) TMI 169 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2717</link>
    <description>For a 100% export oriented unit, customs duty demands on imported inputs and capital goods could not be sustained where recovery was initiated without a reference to the Development Commissioner and without following the prescribed procedure. The Tribunal noted that the adjudication proceeded on alleged non-fulfilment of export obligation and unauthorised clearances, but no prior finding from the Development Commissioner had been obtained. Relying on earlier Tribunal rulings, it held that recovery proceedings in such circumstances were premature and procedurally invalid. The demand was therefore not confirmed, and the revenue appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 10:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42070" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (3) TMI 169 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2717</link>
      <description>For a 100% export oriented unit, customs duty demands on imported inputs and capital goods could not be sustained where recovery was initiated without a reference to the Development Commissioner and without following the prescribed procedure. The Tribunal noted that the adjudication proceeded on alleged non-fulfilment of export obligation and unauthorised clearances, but no prior finding from the Development Commissioner had been obtained. Relying on earlier Tribunal rulings, it held that recovery proceedings in such circumstances were premature and procedurally invalid. The demand was therefore not confirmed, and the revenue appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2717</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>