<?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 (6) TMI 461 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328752</link>
    <description>Goods cleared without duty for export did not lose the benefit of Rule 19(2) of the Central Excise Rules or Notification No. 43/2001-CE (NT) merely because they were routed through a merchant exporter and delivered directly to a manufacturer-exporter for further manufacture and export. The clearance records, export bond, and procedural declarations showed that the goods were removed at the merchant exporter&#039;s instance, intended for export, and in fact underwent further manufacture before export. On those facts, the export-oriented scheme was satisfied and exemption could not be denied for lack of first movement to the merchant exporter&#039;s premises; the denial was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Jun 2016 13:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=431343" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (6) TMI 461 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328752</link>
      <description>Goods cleared without duty for export did not lose the benefit of Rule 19(2) of the Central Excise Rules or Notification No. 43/2001-CE (NT) merely because they were routed through a merchant exporter and delivered directly to a manufacturer-exporter for further manufacture and export. The clearance records, export bond, and procedural declarations showed that the goods were removed at the merchant exporter&#039;s instance, intended for export, and in fact underwent further manufacture before export. On those facts, the export-oriented scheme was satisfied and exemption could not be denied for lack of first movement to the merchant exporter&#039;s premises; the denial was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=328752</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>