<?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 (7) TMI 115 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51933</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai overturned the lower authority&#039;s decision, granting relief to the appellants, a 100% Export-Oriented Unit (EOU), by recognizing their entitlement to the concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 2/95. The Tribunal clarified that advance Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) sales were permissible based on anticipated exports, even if exports had not yet occurred. The Tribunal emphasized that the Notification should be interpreted alongside relevant policy guidelines, allowing the appellants to benefit from the exemption despite alleged discrepancies in value addition and export performance. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2024 11:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=90411" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (7) TMI 115 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51933</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai overturned the lower authority&#039;s decision, granting relief to the appellants, a 100% Export-Oriented Unit (EOU), by recognizing their entitlement to the concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 2/95. The Tribunal clarified that advance Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) sales were permissible based on anticipated exports, even if exports had not yet occurred. The Tribunal emphasized that the Notification should be interpreted alongside relevant policy guidelines, allowing the appellants to benefit from the exemption despite alleged discrepancies in value addition and export performance. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=51933</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>