<?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 883 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384694</link>
    <description>Refund of Special Additional Duty was held admissible where imported goods were subsequently sold locally and Nil sales tax or VAT was paid under the applicable notification. The Tribunal applied the refund notification requiring payment of appropriate sales tax or VAT on the subsequent sale, and treated Nil VAT under the local levy as satisfaction of that condition. It also noted that reliance on the earlier 1998 notification was misplaced because it had been rescinded and did not govern the imports in question. On that basis, the refund condition was found met and SAD refund could not be denied merely because VAT or sales tax was not levied at the SAD rate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2019 16:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=584230" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 883 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384694</link>
      <description>Refund of Special Additional Duty was held admissible where imported goods were subsequently sold locally and Nil sales tax or VAT was paid under the applicable notification. The Tribunal applied the refund notification requiring payment of appropriate sales tax or VAT on the subsequent sale, and treated Nil VAT under the local levy as satisfaction of that condition. It also noted that reliance on the earlier 1998 notification was misplaced because it had been rescinded and did not govern the imports in question. On that basis, the refund condition was found met and SAD refund could not be denied merely because VAT or sales tax was not levied at the SAD rate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384694</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>