<?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>1986 (9) TMI 92 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42450</link>
    <description>Customs duty on a consignment imported under the buffer scheme was treated as recoverable only if the appellant was the importer; the Steel Authority of India&#039;s communication showed that it was the real importer and that duty had been paid by the customer by mistake. On that factual basis, exemption under the buffer scheme applied, and the Tribunal&#039;s contrary view was found erroneous. The duty recovered was therefore held refundable to the party from whom it had been collected, and the order under challenge was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Jun 2010 12:56:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=80979" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1986 (9) TMI 92 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42450</link>
      <description>Customs duty on a consignment imported under the buffer scheme was treated as recoverable only if the appellant was the importer; the Steel Authority of India&#039;s communication showed that it was the real importer and that duty had been paid by the customer by mistake. On that factual basis, exemption under the buffer scheme applied, and the Tribunal&#039;s contrary view was found erroneous. The duty recovered was therefore held refundable to the party from whom it had been collected, and the order under challenge was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 1986 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42450</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>