https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763831 CESTAT Bangalore allowed appeal challenging rejection of conversion of export shipments from Advance Authorization scheme to Duty Drawback scheme. Revenue authorities rejected conversion solely on time bar grounds, requiring application within three months of Let Export Order. Tribunal held that three-month limitation in Circular No.36/2010-Cus was legally untenable since Section 149 of Customs Act, 1962 empowers prescription of time limits through regulations. Notification No.11/2022-Cus introduced two-year period for conversion applications. Conversion from more rigorous Advance Authorization to less rigorous Duty Drawback scheme was permissible. Impugned order set aside. en-us Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Dec 2024 08:39:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763831 CESTAT Bangalore allowed appeal challenging rejection of conversion of export shipments from Advance Authorization scheme to Duty Drawback scheme. Revenue authorities rejected conversion solely on time bar grounds, requiring application within three months of Let Export Order. Tribunal held that three-month limitation in Circular No.36/2010-Cus was legally untenable since Section 149 of Customs Act, 1962 empowers prescription of time limits through regulations. Notification No.11/2022-Cus introduced two-year period for conversion applications. Conversion from more rigorous Advance Authorization to less rigorous Duty Drawback scheme was permissible. Impugned order set aside. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763831