<?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>1978 (7) TMI 115 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41823</link>
    <description>Customs authorities could not finally sustain an additional export duty demand on a short-levy theory where the exporter had supplied the required shipping particulars, those particulars had been examined and accepted before clearance, and there was no clear basis for alleging default or wilful mis-description. The tariff entry and exemption notification had to be applied to determine the correct duty, and tax could not be imposed except by due authority of law. The earlier orders were found not to have properly considered the exporter&#039;s claimed entitlement to Item 24 of the tariff, so the matter was remitted for reconsideration on that rate.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jul 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Jun 2010 12:49:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80352" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1978 (7) TMI 115 - HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41823</link>
      <description>Customs authorities could not finally sustain an additional export duty demand on a short-levy theory where the exporter had supplied the required shipping particulars, those particulars had been examined and accepted before clearance, and there was no clear basis for alleging default or wilful mis-description. The tariff entry and exemption notification had to be applied to determine the correct duty, and tax could not be imposed except by due authority of law. The earlier orders were found not to have properly considered the exporter&#039;s claimed entitlement to Item 24 of the tariff, so the matter was remitted for reconsideration on that rate.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Jul 1978 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41823</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>