<?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>2008 (3) TMI 199 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30535</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled that re-imported goods are exempt from specific customs duties under Notification No. 94/96-Cus. based on unpaid Central Excise duty. It clarified that the exemption is from Customs duty, not Central Excise duty. The goods did not meet criteria for full exemption under Notification No. 34/98-Cus., thus not qualifying for Special Additional Duty exemption. The Commissioner&#039;s interpretation of exemption conditions was criticized, stating that unpaid Central Excise duty is not a prerequisite for exemption. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was allowed, and the Respondents&#039; cross-objection was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69190" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (3) TMI 199 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30535</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled that re-imported goods are exempt from specific customs duties under Notification No. 94/96-Cus. based on unpaid Central Excise duty. It clarified that the exemption is from Customs duty, not Central Excise duty. The goods did not meet criteria for full exemption under Notification No. 34/98-Cus., thus not qualifying for Special Additional Duty exemption. The Commissioner&#039;s interpretation of exemption conditions was criticized, stating that unpaid Central Excise duty is not a prerequisite for exemption. The Revenue&#039;s appeal was allowed, and the Respondents&#039; cross-objection was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30535</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>