<?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 (10) TMI 649 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183669</link>
    <description>An explanatory amendment to an exemption notification was treated as clarificatory, meaning it reflected the original legislative intent rather than creating a new benefit. On that basis, the amendment operated retrospectively, so the customs exemption extended to BOPP films imported for manufacture of electronic capacitor grade metallised dielectric plastic film. The Tribunal relied on its earlier ruling in the same matter and the finality of the Supreme Court&#039;s dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s civil appeal on the identical issue. The differential duty demand was therefore not sustainable, and the exemption benefit applied from the inception of the notification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Jun 2016 16:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432039" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (10) TMI 649 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183669</link>
      <description>An explanatory amendment to an exemption notification was treated as clarificatory, meaning it reflected the original legislative intent rather than creating a new benefit. On that basis, the amendment operated retrospectively, so the customs exemption extended to BOPP films imported for manufacture of electronic capacitor grade metallised dielectric plastic film. The Tribunal relied on its earlier ruling in the same matter and the finality of the Supreme Court&#039;s dismissal of the Revenue&#039;s civil appeal on the identical issue. The differential duty demand was therefore not sustainable, and the exemption benefit applied from the inception of the notification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183669</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>