<?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>Court Rules on Duty-Free Benefits for SEZ Power Plants u/s 26; Refund Requirement Partially Overturned.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=60268</link>
    <description>Entitlement to O&amp;M benefits (fiscal benefits covered under Section 26 of the SEZ Act in respect of maintenance and duty free import to raw materials and consumables for generation of power) - whether the condition that no duty free benefits for transfers to EOU is contrary to the SEZ Act and the Rules made thereunder? - The dispute in the present case relates to the direction to re-demarcate the petitioner’s power plant as a non-processing unit for the purposes of the 2009 Guidelines. The direction to re-demarcate is clearly not traceable to Section 26(2) of the SEZ Act. - The present petition is allowed to the limited extent that the condition imposed by Unit Approval Committee of refunding the O&amp;M benefits obtained by the petitioner during the period 01.04.2015 to 15.02.2016 by its letter dated 18.04.2016, is set aside - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Oct 2021 19:17:29 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Oct 2021 19:17:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=659624" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Court Rules on Duty-Free Benefits for SEZ Power Plants u/s 26; Refund Requirement Partially Overturned.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=60268</link>
      <description>Entitlement to O&amp;M benefits (fiscal benefits covered under Section 26 of the SEZ Act in respect of maintenance and duty free import to raw materials and consumables for generation of power) - whether the condition that no duty free benefits for transfers to EOU is contrary to the SEZ Act and the Rules made thereunder? - The dispute in the present case relates to the direction to re-demarcate the petitioner’s power plant as a non-processing unit for the purposes of the 2009 Guidelines. The direction to re-demarcate is clearly not traceable to Section 26(2) of the SEZ Act. - The present petition is allowed to the limited extent that the condition imposed by Unit Approval Committee of refunding the O&amp;M benefits obtained by the petitioner during the period 01.04.2015 to 15.02.2016 by its letter dated 18.04.2016, is set aside - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Oct 2021 19:17:29 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=60268</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>