Article Section | |||||||||||
Home Articles Customs - Import - Export - SEZ Bimal jain Experts This |
|||||||||||
Customs Department does not need to go deep into matter and by hair-splitting and semantic niceties deny benefit of Exemption Notification |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Customs Department does not need to go deep into matter and by hair-splitting and semantic niceties deny benefit of Exemption Notification |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Customs Department does not need to go deep into matter and by hair-splitting and semantic niceties deny benefit of Exemption NotificationGMR Energy Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore [2015 (11) TMI 81 - SUPREME COURT ]GMR Energy Ltd. (“the Appellant”) claimed the benefit of the Exemption Notification No. 21/2002-Customs dated March 1, 2002 (“the Exemption Notification”) in respect of which, the importer was required to produce a certificate from an officer. However, the Appellant did not produce the same at the time of import but produced it later on. The Department denied the benefit of Exemption Notification to the Appellant on the ground that at the time of importation, the required Certificate was not produced. The Hon’ble Apex Court held as under:
Thus, the Hon’ble Supreme Court allowed the benefit of Exemption Notification to the Appellant.
By: Bimal jain - November 17, 2015
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||