https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346821 Import of refrigerant gas R-22 by a 100% EOU was treated as covered by a valid Letter of Permission and specific approval issued by the competent Development Commissioner, so a separate special import licence was not required on these facts. Paragraph 6.2.7 of the Handbook of Procedure was applied to treat the Letter of Permission as sufficient authorisation, and the import was assessed by the permission in force on the date of shipment. Later cancellation of the Letter of Permission was held not to operate retrospectively to invalidate imports already completed, and repacking from bulk to retail was treated as manufacture satisfying the actual user condition. Absolute confiscation and penalty were therefore not sustainable. en-us Wed, 19 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Jan 2018 10:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346821 Import of refrigerant gas R-22 by a 100% EOU was treated as covered by a valid Letter of Permission and specific approval issued by the competent Development Commissioner, so a separate special import licence was not required on these facts. Paragraph 6.2.7 of the Handbook of Procedure was applied to treat the Letter of Permission as sufficient authorisation, and the import was assessed by the permission in force on the date of shipment. Later cancellation of the Letter of Permission was held not to operate retrospectively to invalidate imports already completed, and repacking from bulk to retail was treated as manufacture satisfying the actual user condition. Absolute confiscation and penalty were therefore not sustainable. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 19 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346821