https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31003 Notification No. 160/92-Cus. required fulfilment of the export obligation and a prescribed declaration that the exported goods were manufactured from the imported capital goods. The Board circular was limited to a declaration and supporting statement and did not require Customs to conduct independent verification absent contrary material. Where the licensing authority had certified that the export obligation was fulfilled and Customs produced no evidence to rebut that certificate or the importer's explanation, Customs could not deny the exemption or reopen the matter merely on suspicion. The denial of exemption was therefore unjustified and the Revenue's appeal failed. en-us Tue, 08 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31003 Notification No. 160/92-Cus. required fulfilment of the export obligation and a prescribed declaration that the exported goods were manufactured from the imported capital goods. The Board circular was limited to a declaration and supporting statement and did not require Customs to conduct independent verification absent contrary material. Where the licensing authority had certified that the export obligation was fulfilled and Customs produced no evidence to rebut that certificate or the importer's explanation, Customs could not deny the exemption or reopen the matter merely on suspicion. The denial of exemption was therefore unjustified and the Revenue's appeal failed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 08 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31003