<?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 (8) TMI 226 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384037</link>
    <description>Customs duty exemption under the relevant notification could not be denied on a broader reading of the condition where departmental corrigenda and circulars clarified its limited scope. The clarification showed that the condition was meant only to prevent simultaneous benefit of rebate on duty paid on materials and the advance licence benefit, and not to bar rebate on terminal excise duty on the export product. The clarifications also recognized exports routed through a merchant exporter. As the assessee&#039;s advance licence was issued after the corrigendum restoring the correct position, the Revenue&#039;s objection based on condition No. 5 failed and the exemption was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Nov 2019 14:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=582417" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 226 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384037</link>
      <description>Customs duty exemption under the relevant notification could not be denied on a broader reading of the condition where departmental corrigenda and circulars clarified its limited scope. The clarification showed that the condition was meant only to prevent simultaneous benefit of rebate on duty paid on materials and the advance licence benefit, and not to bar rebate on terminal excise duty on the export product. The clarifications also recognized exports routed through a merchant exporter. As the assessee&#039;s advance licence was issued after the corrigendum restoring the correct position, the Revenue&#039;s objection based on condition No. 5 failed and the exemption was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384037</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>