<?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 (7) TMI 186 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54231</link>
    <description>A Board circular could not confer a concessional duty rate for clearances by a 100% export oriented unit to the domestic tariff area where the governing notification did not permit that treatment. The notification had statutory force and prevailed over any conflicting clarification in the circular. Accordingly, the exemption scheme had to be applied as framed by the notification, and the unit remained liable to duty on the terms of that notification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Oct 2010 09:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92708" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (7) TMI 186 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54231</link>
      <description>A Board circular could not confer a concessional duty rate for clearances by a 100% export oriented unit to the domestic tariff area where the governing notification did not permit that treatment. The notification had statutory force and prevailed over any conflicting clarification in the circular. Accordingly, the exemption scheme had to be applied as framed by the notification, and the unit remained liable to duty on the terms of that notification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54231</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>