<?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>2004 (8) TMI 147 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53033</link>
    <description>Exemption under a customs notification is available only on strict compliance with its stated conditions, and the importer must prove entitlement to the benefit. The imported capital goods were meant for an export-oriented project that was not implemented, the prescribed certificate was not produced, and permission from the Development Commissioner could not replace the certificate required by the notification; the plea of provisional assessment also failed for want of endorsement in the Bills of Entry. Customs duty demand was sustained. Penalty was considered justified in principle, but the corporate penalty was reduced and the personal penalty was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Oct 2010 11:44:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91510" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 147 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53033</link>
      <description>Exemption under a customs notification is available only on strict compliance with its stated conditions, and the importer must prove entitlement to the benefit. The imported capital goods were meant for an export-oriented project that was not implemented, the prescribed certificate was not produced, and permission from the Development Commissioner could not replace the certificate required by the notification; the plea of provisional assessment also failed for want of endorsement in the Bills of Entry. Customs duty demand was sustained. Penalty was considered justified in principle, but the corporate penalty was reduced and the personal penalty was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53033</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>