<?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>1992 (2) TMI 108 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49119</link>
    <description>Where a drawback rate application expressly contemplated exports through both self and merchant exporters, drawback under the brand rate letter could not be denied merely because the actual shipment was made by a merchant exporter. The benefit remained available, provided a disclaimer certificate was obtained from the merchant exporter and customs was satisfied that there was no double payment for the same export, and that the goods were in fact manufactured and cleared by the applicant and covered by the rate letter. The revision was allowed and the manufacturer&#039;s entitlement to drawback was upheld subject to verification of these conditions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2010 16:45:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=87599" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1992 (2) TMI 108 - GOVERNMENT OF INDIA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49119</link>
      <description>Where a drawback rate application expressly contemplated exports through both self and merchant exporters, drawback under the brand rate letter could not be denied merely because the actual shipment was made by a merchant exporter. The benefit remained available, provided a disclaimer certificate was obtained from the merchant exporter and customs was satisfied that there was no double payment for the same export, and that the goods were in fact manufactured and cleared by the applicant and covered by the rate letter. The revision was allowed and the manufacturer&#039;s entitlement to drawback was upheld subject to verification of these conditions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 1992 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49119</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>