<?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>2023 (3) TMI 304 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434918</link>
    <description>Customs authorities may independently examine compliance with an undertaking attached to an exemption notification and are not bound by the DGCA&#039;s view; that issue was decided in favour of Revenue. However, an aircraft operated for remuneration under a valid DGCA permit may still fall within non-scheduled (passenger) services for the notification condition, and the absence of a published tariff does not by itself establish non-compliance; that issue was decided in favour of the assessee. The result was that Customs could scrutinise fulfilment of Condition 104, while the substantive finding that the respondent satisfied the exemption requirement was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 01 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2026 14:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=707037" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (3) TMI 304 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434918</link>
      <description>Customs authorities may independently examine compliance with an undertaking attached to an exemption notification and are not bound by the DGCA&#039;s view; that issue was decided in favour of Revenue. However, an aircraft operated for remuneration under a valid DGCA permit may still fall within non-scheduled (passenger) services for the notification condition, and the absence of a published tariff does not by itself establish non-compliance; that issue was decided in favour of the assessee. The result was that Customs could scrutinise fulfilment of Condition 104, while the substantive finding that the respondent satisfied the exemption requirement was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 01 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=434918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>