https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393921 Compliance with the notification was treated as requiring examination of the goods by the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner, because that higher-level scrutiny was intended to ensure proper identification of re-exported goods and prevent misuse of the benefit. Examination by a lower-ranking officer was held insufficient, and the Tribunal's finding of non-compliance was upheld. The Court also declined to reappraise the factual conclusion in appellate jurisdiction, finding no perversity in the Tribunal's interpretation or its application of the notification. en-us Wed, 04 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 25 Mar 2020 13:10:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393921 Compliance with the notification was treated as requiring examination of the goods by the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner, because that higher-level scrutiny was intended to ensure proper identification of re-exported goods and prevent misuse of the benefit. Examination by a lower-ranking officer was held insufficient, and the Tribunal's finding of non-compliance was upheld. The Court also declined to reappraise the factual conclusion in appellate jurisdiction, finding no perversity in the Tribunal's interpretation or its application of the notification. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 04 Mar 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393921