<?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 (10) TMI 128 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54619</link>
    <description>Deemed exports were held to count toward export value when computing the free on board limit for Domestic Tariff Area clearance under the exemption regime, because the notification used the term &quot;exports&quot; without express exclusion and the scheme had to be read harmoniously. Inter-unit supplies from another 100% Export Oriented Unit were also not to be treated as imported materials for denying exemption, as that approach was inconsistent with the legal character of Export Oriented Units and the notification. On that reasoning, the exemption denial was unsustainable and the consequential duty and penalty demands were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=93096" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (10) TMI 128 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54619</link>
      <description>Deemed exports were held to count toward export value when computing the free on board limit for Domestic Tariff Area clearance under the exemption regime, because the notification used the term &quot;exports&quot; without express exclusion and the scheme had to be read harmoniously. Inter-unit supplies from another 100% Export Oriented Unit were also not to be treated as imported materials for denying exemption, as that approach was inconsistent with the legal character of Export Oriented Units and the notification. On that reasoning, the exemption denial was unsustainable and the consequential duty and penalty demands were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54619</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>