<?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>RoDTEP benefit not claimed in Shipping Bill</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/forum/issue?id=119193</link>
    <description>Amendment of a shipping bill to claim RoDTEP post-export may be pursued under the Customs amendment provision by cancelling the Let Export Order; courts and a Board circular have supported correction for inadvertent procedural lapses so as not to deny export incentives, but CBIC guidance states that failure to indicate RoDTEP in the shipping bill will preclude accrual and administrative denial is frequent, making litigation a recurring pathway.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jul 2024 12:16:18 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2025 10:40:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=759227" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>RoDTEP benefit not claimed in Shipping Bill</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/forum/issue?id=119193</link>
      <description>Amendment of a shipping bill to claim RoDTEP post-export may be pursued under the Customs amendment provision by cancelling the Let Export Order; courts and a Board circular have supported correction for inadvertent procedural lapses so as not to deny export incentives, but CBIC guidance states that failure to indicate RoDTEP in the shipping bill will preclude accrual and administrative denial is frequent, making litigation a recurring pathway.</description>
      <category>Discussion-Forum</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 06 Jul 2024 12:16:18 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/forum/issue?id=119193</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>