<?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>2002 (10) TMI 111 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46769</link>
    <description>Concessional benefits under an export processing scheme carried corresponding export obligations and value-addition norms, and failure to comply attracted the prescribed penalty for breach of import and export conditions. The show cause notice was not invalid merely because it omitted the exact statutory provision, where the substance of the alleged breach was clear. A plea of bona fide conduct and absence of contumacious intent did not displace the penalty regime after the party had enjoyed scheme benefits but failed to perform the required obligations. Mitigating factors such as fire, labour unrest and business difficulty had already been considered, and the appellate committee reduced the penalty and lifted debarment; the reduced penalty was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Jul 2010 17:57:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=85289" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (10) TMI 111 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46769</link>
      <description>Concessional benefits under an export processing scheme carried corresponding export obligations and value-addition norms, and failure to comply attracted the prescribed penalty for breach of import and export conditions. The show cause notice was not invalid merely because it omitted the exact statutory provision, where the substance of the alleged breach was clear. A plea of bona fide conduct and absence of contumacious intent did not displace the penalty regime after the party had enjoyed scheme benefits but failed to perform the required obligations. Mitigating factors such as fire, labour unrest and business difficulty had already been considered, and the appellate committee reduced the penalty and lifted debarment; the reduced penalty was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=46769</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>