https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467278 Equipment first imported for use under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs and later moved from a Domestic Tariff Area to a Free Trade Warehousing Zone did not qualify as re-import when cleared back into the Domestic Tariff Area. The Authority found that the exemption under Notification No. 45/2017-Customs applies only where goods are re-imported in the contemplated sense, and that mere movement from FTWZ to DTA is neither import nor re-import under the SEZ Act, 2005 or customs law. Rule 48 of the SEZ Rules, 2006 was held inapplicable, Circular No. 21/2019-Customs was distinguished on facts, and the second proviso to the notification also supported denial of the benefit. The exemption from customs duty, IGST and compensation cess was therefore rejected. en-us Wed, 28 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 12 Mar 2026 21:52:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467278 Equipment first imported for use under Notification No. 50/2017-Customs and later moved from a Domestic Tariff Area to a Free Trade Warehousing Zone did not qualify as re-import when cleared back into the Domestic Tariff Area. The Authority found that the exemption under Notification No. 45/2017-Customs applies only where goods are re-imported in the contemplated sense, and that mere movement from FTWZ to DTA is neither import nor re-import under the SEZ Act, 2005 or customs law. Rule 48 of the SEZ Rules, 2006 was held inapplicable, Circular No. 21/2019-Customs was distinguished on facts, and the second proviso to the notification also supported denial of the benefit. The exemption from customs duty, IGST and compensation cess was therefore rejected. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 28 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467278