<?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>2019 (2) TMI 890 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375263</link>
    <description>Amended exemption notifications were construed as imposing, and then relaxing, conditions on duty payment on inputs and non-availment of credit in manufacture. The Tribunal treated the earlier judicial view on the exemption notification as continuing and noted that the appellate authority had already considered the relevant Supreme Court ruling along with the amended notifications. It also relied on its own final orders in identical disputes between the same parties, which had attained finality. On that basis, the Tribunal upheld the assessee&#039;s entitlement to the exemption benefit for the imported goods and found no reason to interfere with the impugned orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Feb 2020 12:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=558225" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 890 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375263</link>
      <description>Amended exemption notifications were construed as imposing, and then relaxing, conditions on duty payment on inputs and non-availment of credit in manufacture. The Tribunal treated the earlier judicial view on the exemption notification as continuing and noted that the appellate authority had already considered the relevant Supreme Court ruling along with the amended notifications. It also relied on its own final orders in identical disputes between the same parties, which had attained finality. On that basis, the Tribunal upheld the assessee&#039;s entitlement to the exemption benefit for the imported goods and found no reason to interfere with the impugned orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375263</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>