<?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 (5) TMI 391 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379663</link>
    <description>Testing authority reports and clarifications establishing that imported goods were made from plastic waste or scrap, including PET bottle flakes, support eligibility for the specified excise exemption where no contrary expert evidence is produced. Mere allegations of ambiguity do not displace factual findings from testing of the imported goods. The exemption claim was therefore accepted. Entitlement to reduced countervailing duty based on non-availment of input and input-service credit required factual verification because it had not been examined at the appellate stage. That issue was remitted for limited reconsideration, resulting in rejection of the challenge to the exemption and partial allowance of the connected appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Mar 2020 12:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=569885" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (5) TMI 391 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379663</link>
      <description>Testing authority reports and clarifications establishing that imported goods were made from plastic waste or scrap, including PET bottle flakes, support eligibility for the specified excise exemption where no contrary expert evidence is produced. Mere allegations of ambiguity do not displace factual findings from testing of the imported goods. The exemption claim was therefore accepted. Entitlement to reduced countervailing duty based on non-availment of input and input-service credit required factual verification because it had not been examined at the appellate stage. That issue was remitted for limited reconsideration, resulting in rejection of the challenge to the exemption and partial allowance of the connected appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=379663</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>