<?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>2018 (3) TMI 404 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356701</link>
    <description>Exports made through third-party premises were initially objected to as contrary to the Exim Policy, but the Ministry of Commerce and Industry later regularised the procedure and condoned the violation. Once the competent authority ratified the exports, the show-cause proceedings had no surviving foundation, and the customs duty demand based solely on the alleged procedural infraction could not be sustained. The appellate forum found no material to disturb that conclusion, and the order dropping the proceedings was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 10 Mar 2018 06:55:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512089" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 404 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356701</link>
      <description>Exports made through third-party premises were initially objected to as contrary to the Exim Policy, but the Ministry of Commerce and Industry later regularised the procedure and condoned the violation. Once the competent authority ratified the exports, the show-cause proceedings had no surviving foundation, and the customs duty demand based solely on the alleged procedural infraction could not be sustained. The appellate forum found no material to disturb that conclusion, and the order dropping the proceedings was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356701</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>