https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49917 A demand of duty and related penalties against a 100% Export Oriented Unit was treated as premature because the competent authority had not ordered de-bonding and the Development Commissioner had extended the unit's EOU status. In the absence of de-bonding, and with no allegation of clandestine removal into the domestic tariff area, the proceedings could not be sustained at that stage. The note applies Board circulars and earlier Tribunal reasoning to state that duty liability should be examined only after de-bonding is ordered by the competent authority, with the matter remitted for fresh consideration at that point. en-us Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Aug 2010 14:04:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49917 A demand of duty and related penalties against a 100% Export Oriented Unit was treated as premature because the competent authority had not ordered de-bonding and the Development Commissioner had extended the unit's EOU status. In the absence of de-bonding, and with no allegation of clandestine removal into the domestic tariff area, the proceedings could not be sustained at that stage. The note applies Board circulars and earlier Tribunal reasoning to state that duty liability should be examined only after de-bonding is ordered by the competent authority, with the matter remitted for fresh consideration at that point. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 23 Jun 2000 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=49917