<?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>2003 (1) TMI 134 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48615</link>
    <description>Rebate of central excise duty on exported goods was admissible where the exported consignments were supported by export documents, customs endorsement, and proof of duty payment, and no Modvat credit had been taken. Allowance of customs drawback did not bar rebate of the central excise component because the two claims related to distinct duty elements. The export in question was treated as established on the record, and the rebate claim succeeded accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2010 13:42:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87097" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (1) TMI 134 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48615</link>
      <description>Rebate of central excise duty on exported goods was admissible where the exported consignments were supported by export documents, customs endorsement, and proof of duty payment, and no Modvat credit had been taken. Allowance of customs drawback did not bar rebate of the central excise component because the two claims related to distinct duty elements. The export in question was treated as established on the record, and the rebate claim succeeded accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 24 Jan 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=48615</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>