<?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>2016 (5) TMI 558 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327577</link>
    <description>Drawback may remain available where exported inputs are traceably used in manufacturing finished goods sold abroad, and the claim is confined to the value of the exported inputs. Rule 16A of the Drawback Rules applies only when the relevant export proceeds are not realised; where sale proceeds are received for the finished garments and there is no inflated drawback claim, non-realisation is not established. Non-registration of supporting suppliers does not by itself defeat drawback, since exempt units may remain unregistered and entitlement may still subsist absent proof of inadmissible Cenvat credit or fraud. On this reasoning, rejection of drawback and penalty were not justified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2017 14:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=428065" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (5) TMI 558 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327577</link>
      <description>Drawback may remain available where exported inputs are traceably used in manufacturing finished goods sold abroad, and the claim is confined to the value of the exported inputs. Rule 16A of the Drawback Rules applies only when the relevant export proceeds are not realised; where sale proceeds are received for the finished garments and there is no inflated drawback claim, non-realisation is not established. Non-registration of supporting suppliers does not by itself defeat drawback, since exempt units may remain unregistered and entitlement may still subsist absent proof of inadmissible Cenvat credit or fraud. On this reasoning, rejection of drawback and penalty were not justified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=327577</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>