https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763740 The CESTAT Bangalore held that a 100% EOU was eligible for benefits under Notification No. 52/2003-Cus for reimporting food items beyond one year from original exportation. The tribunal ruled that "repair and reconditioning" under S.No. 14 has extensive meaning including reprocessing, and applies to goods not specified in Annexure-VII within three years of export. Since the appellant disclosed export details without suppression, executed required bonds, and re-exported within stipulated timeframes, the duty demand was unjustified and barred by limitation. Appeal allowed. en-us Tue, 27 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Dec 2024 09:00:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763740 The CESTAT Bangalore held that a 100% EOU was eligible for benefits under Notification No. 52/2003-Cus for reimporting food items beyond one year from original exportation. The tribunal ruled that "repair and reconditioning" under S.No. 14 has extensive meaning including reprocessing, and applies to goods not specified in Annexure-VII within three years of export. Since the appellant disclosed export details without suppression, executed required bonds, and re-exported within stipulated timeframes, the duty demand was unjustified and barred by limitation. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 27 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763740