https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345401 The court held that the petitioner, a tractor manufacturer, was not entitled to a rebate of duty under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, after availing benefits under Notification No.93/2004-Cus under the Customs Act, 1962. The court emphasized that the benefits under Advance Authorizations exempting customs duty on imports were already availed, and Rule 18 rebate was subject to conditions, including the non-availment of certain benefits specified in the notification. Therefore, the court upheld the Revisional Authority's decision, denying the petitioner's claim for relief and dismissing the writ petition without costs. en-us Thu, 13 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 27 Dec 2017 17:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345401 The court held that the petitioner, a tractor manufacturer, was not entitled to a rebate of duty under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002, after availing benefits under Notification No.93/2004-Cus under the Customs Act, 1962. The court emphasized that the benefits under Advance Authorizations exempting customs duty on imports were already availed, and Rule 18 rebate was subject to conditions, including the non-availment of certain benefits specified in the notification. Therefore, the court upheld the Revisional Authority's decision, denying the petitioner's claim for relief and dismissing the writ petition without costs. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 13 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345401