https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353962 Polyester staple fibre received under deemed export benefits was treated as imported goods for purposes of Notification No. 23/03-CE because Explanation II covered such supplies. As the raw material was not wholly from goods produced or manufactured in India, the condition for exemption on DTA clearances was not met, and the duty demand was sustained. However, the dispute was one of notification interpretation rather than mala fide conduct, so penal consequences under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act and personal penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules were not warranted. The penalties were set aside, leaving the substantive tax liability intact. en-us Thu, 04 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Nov 2018 13:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353962 Polyester staple fibre received under deemed export benefits was treated as imported goods for purposes of Notification No. 23/03-CE because Explanation II covered such supplies. As the raw material was not wholly from goods produced or manufactured in India, the condition for exemption on DTA clearances was not met, and the duty demand was sustained. However, the dispute was one of notification interpretation rather than mala fide conduct, so penal consequences under Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act and personal penalty under Rule 26 of the Central Excise Rules were not warranted. The penalties were set aside, leaving the substantive tax liability intact. Case-Laws Central Excise Thu, 04 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353962