<?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 150 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53046</link>
    <description>Robenidine Hydrochloride was held to fall within the exemption under Notification No. 17/95-Cus. because the later substitution of &quot;Robenidine&quot; with &quot;Robenidine HCL&quot; in Notification No. 161/95-Cus. showed that the intended exempted product was the salt form imported by the assessee. The short interval between the two notifications supported the view that the amendment was clarificatory of the original exemption&#039;s scope, rather than a retrospective enlargement of benefit. On that construction, the exemption was available to Robenidine Hydrochloride and the matter was decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Oct 2010 12:18:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=91523" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 150 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53046</link>
      <description>Robenidine Hydrochloride was held to fall within the exemption under Notification No. 17/95-Cus. because the later substitution of &quot;Robenidine&quot; with &quot;Robenidine HCL&quot; in Notification No. 161/95-Cus. showed that the intended exempted product was the salt form imported by the assessee. The short interval between the two notifications supported the view that the amendment was clarificatory of the original exemption&#039;s scope, rather than a retrospective enlargement of benefit. On that construction, the exemption was available to Robenidine Hydrochloride and the matter was decided in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=53046</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>