<?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>1989 (8) TMI 84 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42573</link>
    <description>Customs authorities cannot add conditions to an exemption notification by demanding a manufacturer&#039;s catalogue, literature or a surface-area valuation explanation where those requirements are absent from the notification. Administrative precautions cannot enlarge the statutory terms of concessional treatment, and the extra demands were held unsustainable. However, an end-use bond and supporting verification to ensure the imported stamping foils are actually consumed in the leather industry were treated as consistent with the exemption scheme and permissible as revenue safeguards. The result was that only the additional conditions lacking any basis in the notification were struck down, while end-use compliance requirements were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Jun 2010 10:39:27 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=81102" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (8) TMI 84 - HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42573</link>
      <description>Customs authorities cannot add conditions to an exemption notification by demanding a manufacturer&#039;s catalogue, literature or a surface-area valuation explanation where those requirements are absent from the notification. Administrative precautions cannot enlarge the statutory terms of concessional treatment, and the extra demands were held unsustainable. However, an end-use bond and supporting verification to ensure the imported stamping foils are actually consumed in the leather industry were treated as consistent with the exemption scheme and permissible as revenue safeguards. The result was that only the additional conditions lacking any basis in the notification were struck down, while end-use compliance requirements were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Aug 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=42573</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>