<?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>2005 (8) TMI 176 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54210</link>
    <description>Duty-free imports under an advance licence remain conditional on non-disposal and use only towards export obligation, and the importer bears the burden of proving continued existence and permitted utilisation of the goods to retain the exemption. Here, the Tribunal found that the imported mulberry raw silk yarn was not satisfactorily shown to remain with the bank as hypothecated stock or to have been used for export compliance, so violation of the notification condition and non-fulfilment of export obligation were established; the duty demand was upheld. Penalty under Section 114A and interest under Section 28AB of the Customs Act were, however, inapplicable to imports made before 28-9-1996, while the personal penalties under Section 112 were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Oct 2010 15:45:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (8) TMI 176 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54210</link>
      <description>Duty-free imports under an advance licence remain conditional on non-disposal and use only towards export obligation, and the importer bears the burden of proving continued existence and permitted utilisation of the goods to retain the exemption. Here, the Tribunal found that the imported mulberry raw silk yarn was not satisfactorily shown to remain with the bank as hypothecated stock or to have been used for export compliance, so violation of the notification condition and non-fulfilment of export obligation were established; the duty demand was upheld. Penalty under Section 114A and interest under Section 28AB of the Customs Act were, however, inapplicable to imports made before 28-9-1996, while the personal penalties under Section 112 were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Aug 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54210</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>