<?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 (12) TMI 761 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336116</link>
    <description>Additional customs duty (CVD) exemption for imported undyed and unprinted silk fabrics was considered under the corresponding customs notification linked to an excise exemption. The Tribunal applied prior authority and held that the exemption could not be denied on a technical reading of the excise notification conditions where a domestic manufacturer of like goods would not face duty on the relevant input and no Cenvat credit issue would arise. The operative test was the actual excise duty incidence on a like article manufactured in India, read with the specific notification. On that basis, the exemption benefit was upheld and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Sep 2017 10:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=451684" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 761 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336116</link>
      <description>Additional customs duty (CVD) exemption for imported undyed and unprinted silk fabrics was considered under the corresponding customs notification linked to an excise exemption. The Tribunal applied prior authority and held that the exemption could not be denied on a technical reading of the excise notification conditions where a domestic manufacturer of like goods would not face duty on the relevant input and no Cenvat credit issue would arise. The operative test was the actual excise duty incidence on a like article manufactured in India, read with the specific notification. On that basis, the exemption benefit was upheld and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336116</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>