https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761480 The CESTAT Ahmedabad set aside a differential duty demand against a 100% EOU for goods cleared to DTA. The appellant successfully established that imported raw materials were used only for export goods, not DTA clearances, through proper record maintenance. The tribunal held that benefits under Notification 23/2003-CE were correctly availed as all conditions were fulfilled. The demand for SAD was rejected since goods weren't exempted from sales tax/VAT. Extended limitation period was ruled inapplicable as the case involved pure legal interpretation without evidence of malafide intent, fraud, or suppression of facts. Appeal allowed. en-us Mon, 04 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 Nov 2024 08:52:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761480 The CESTAT Ahmedabad set aside a differential duty demand against a 100% EOU for goods cleared to DTA. The appellant successfully established that imported raw materials were used only for export goods, not DTA clearances, through proper record maintenance. The tribunal held that benefits under Notification 23/2003-CE were correctly availed as all conditions were fulfilled. The demand for SAD was rejected since goods weren't exempted from sales tax/VAT. Extended limitation period was ruled inapplicable as the case involved pure legal interpretation without evidence of malafide intent, fraud, or suppression of facts. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 04 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=761480