<?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 (5) TMI 111 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51908</link>
    <description>Re-imported goods exported earlier under bond without Central Excise duty attracted a duty burden, under Notification No. 94/96-Cus., equivalent in substance to additional duty of customs equal to Central Excise duty. The mere fact that customs booked the amount under the head of basic customs duty did not change its true character. Modvat credit was therefore admissible on the duty paid at re-importation, and denial of credit was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Sep 2010 11:51:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90386" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (5) TMI 111 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51908</link>
      <description>Re-imported goods exported earlier under bond without Central Excise duty attracted a duty burden, under Notification No. 94/96-Cus., equivalent in substance to additional duty of customs equal to Central Excise duty. The mere fact that customs booked the amount under the head of basic customs duty did not change its true character. Modvat credit was therefore admissible on the duty paid at re-importation, and denial of credit was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51908</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>