https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333271 The exemption from Special Additional Duty under Notification No. 56/98-Cus was available because the declaration filed for that relief was distinct from the declaration under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The former related to exemption from SAD on imported goods, while the latter concerned CVD and the enabling of Modvat credit. As the two declarations served different statutory purposes and operated independently, the filing of both did not, by itself, establish impermissible double benefit. The allegation of dual advantage was therefore rejected and the SAD exemption was treated as correctly claimed. en-us Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 28 Oct 2016 12:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333271 The exemption from Special Additional Duty under Notification No. 56/98-Cus was available because the declaration filed for that relief was distinct from the declaration under Rule 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The former related to exemption from SAD on imported goods, while the latter concerned CVD and the enabling of Modvat credit. As the two declarations served different statutory purposes and operated independently, the filing of both did not, by itself, establish impermissible double benefit. The allegation of dual advantage was therefore rejected and the SAD exemption was treated as correctly claimed. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 18 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333271