<?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 207 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3989</link>
    <description>A 100% Export Oriented Unit that had commenced commercial production but could not meet export obligations because of circumstances beyond its control was held entitled to depreciation on duty-free imported capital goods and the benefit of the exemption notification. The analysis noted that the unit had imported capital goods and raw materials under the EOU scheme, and that commercial production had in fact begun, including supplies to other exporters in India. As the notification allowed depreciation from the date of commencement of commercial production, the refusal of exemption and depreciation was not justified. The Revenue&#039;s objection therefore failed, and the unit retained the benefit of the notification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43336" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (10) TMI 207 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3989</link>
      <description>A 100% Export Oriented Unit that had commenced commercial production but could not meet export obligations because of circumstances beyond its control was held entitled to depreciation on duty-free imported capital goods and the benefit of the exemption notification. The analysis noted that the unit had imported capital goods and raw materials under the EOU scheme, and that commercial production had in fact begun, including supplies to other exporters in India. As the notification allowed depreciation from the date of commencement of commercial production, the refusal of exemption and depreciation was not justified. The Revenue&#039;s objection therefore failed, and the unit retained the benefit of the notification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=3989</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>