<?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 (11) TMI 853 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370510</link>
    <description>Concessional export duty under Notification No. 62/2007-Customs depended on reliable proof of the Fe content in iron ore fines, including whether it had to be measured on a wet basis for exemption eligibility. Three test reports were considered, but the CRCL report did not specify wet or dry basis, while the other reports indicated a lower Fe content. The record also raised doubts about the authenticity and representative nature of samples drawn outside the presence of all concerned parties. Applying the principle that exemption notifications are to be strictly construed, any ambiguity was treated against the assessee, and the exemption was not established.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Nov 2019 15:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=542544" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 853 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370510</link>
      <description>Concessional export duty under Notification No. 62/2007-Customs depended on reliable proof of the Fe content in iron ore fines, including whether it had to be measured on a wet basis for exemption eligibility. Three test reports were considered, but the CRCL report did not specify wet or dry basis, while the other reports indicated a lower Fe content. The record also raised doubts about the authenticity and representative nature of samples drawn outside the presence of all concerned parties. Applying the principle that exemption notifications are to be strictly construed, any ambiguity was treated against the assessee, and the exemption was not established.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370510</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>