<?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>2017 (9) TMI 1739 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275486</link>
    <description>Re-imported defective goods exported duty free under the DEPB scheme were held not to justify Cenvat credit of the additional duty of customs, because the earlier export had not suffered excise duty and the return of the goods attracted excise-duty consequences. The claimed credit was therefore unavailable, and the benefit of Notification No. 94/96-Cus. dated 16.12.1996 was also denied.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2019 15:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=537063" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1739 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275486</link>
      <description>Re-imported defective goods exported duty free under the DEPB scheme were held not to justify Cenvat credit of the additional duty of customs, because the earlier export had not suffered excise duty and the return of the goods attracted excise-duty consequences. The claimed credit was therefore unavailable, and the benefit of Notification No. 94/96-Cus. dated 16.12.1996 was also denied.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=275486</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>