Compliance to the mandatory Indian Quality Standards as mentioned in Column 2 of the Annexure to notification no. 44 dated 24.11.2000, shall not be applicable on imports made under Annual Advance Licences and Advance Licences for physical exports issued with actual user condition, (para 7.4 and 7.4A of Exim Policy prior to RE-2000 and 7.3 of Exim Policy RE-2000) and on imports made by 100% EOUs and units in EPZ/SEZ. Similarly the imports made for re-export purposes as per para 5.7 and para 7.5 of the Exim Policy shall also be exempt from the above mentioned qulilty standards.
In order to take care of this problem he has suggested issue of a Notification under Section 81 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962 specifying the maximum time limit within which the passengers should make a declaration before Customs. Since this Notification will have implication for all the passengers coming at any of the Airport, the matter may be examined regarding the implication of the proposal; suggested time limit ( 4 hours or any other time frame); as also the type of penal provision that may be imposed for the failure to adhere to the condition.
Circular No. 572/9/2001-CX I am directed to state that it has come to notice of the Board that doubts prevail in the field formations in regard to action to be taken for disposal of refund/rebate cases where the matter is pending with different appellate authorities. In this regard, attention is drawn to the CBEC Circular No.398/31/98-CX dated 2nd June, 1998 and the CBEC Circular No.76/95-Cus dated 28th June, 1995. After examining the issue in detail and in suppression of the aforementioned Circulars,
Circular No.571/8/2001-CX I am directed to say that the Board has reviewed the working of the system of fortnightly payment of duty, which was introduced in the Budget for the year 2000-2001. The figures indicate that there have been considerable defaults in payments by large number of assessees. Indeed, legal provisions have been made to discourage defaults but it is necessary that executive measures should also be taken so that such defaults do not take place at all.
Explore the Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Smt. Sandhya Rani Dutta, addressing pivotal questions on Hindu personal law. The ruling asserts that, according to the Dayabhaga School, a male presence is essential for the constitution of a Hindu Undivided Family (HUF). Delve into the detailed analysis of the case, where the court examines whether female heirs can form a joint Hindu family by agreement and impress upon inherited property the character of joint family property. Gain insights into the court’s interpretation and its impact on income tax assessments for the assessees involved.
