https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348148 EPCG exemption under Notification No. 111/95-Cus was retained where the licensing authority treated two EPCG licences as covering the same export products and permitted continuation of the zero-duty facility. The imported capital goods were put to use, the export obligation was fulfilled, and the licensing authority issued a letter acknowledging such fulfilment. Allegations of misrepresentation were rejected because imports made before the amendment by Notification No. 70/97-Cus did not attract duty, and duty on later imports had been paid. Customs could not disregard the licensing authority's determination in the absence of any declaration that the licence was invalid. en-us Fri, 08 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 08 Mar 2019 13:05:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348148 EPCG exemption under Notification No. 111/95-Cus was retained where the licensing authority treated two EPCG licences as covering the same export products and permitted continuation of the zero-duty facility. The imported capital goods were put to use, the export obligation was fulfilled, and the licensing authority issued a letter acknowledging such fulfilment. Allegations of misrepresentation were rejected because imports made before the amendment by Notification No. 70/97-Cus did not attract duty, and duty on later imports had been paid. Customs could not disregard the licensing authority's determination in the absence of any declaration that the licence was invalid. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 08 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348148