Excise

Export warehousing facility extended to Ahmedabad Gujarat. Places where warehouses may be established to store excisable goods for export

Export warehousing facility extended to Ahmedabad Gujarat. Places where warehouses may be established to store excisable goods for export

Circular No. 1051/39/2016-CX

F. NO. 209/10/2013-CX.6
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS

North  Block, New Delhi
Dated the  15th of December, 2016

To,
The Principal Chief Commissioners/ Chief Commissioners of Central Excise (All)
The Director General (All)

Sub: Export warehousing-Extension of facility in Ahmedabad  District of Gujarat-reg.

Madam/Sir,

I am directed to refer to Board ‘s Circular No. 581/18/2001-CX dated 29th June, 2001 which, infer alia, specifies conditions. procedures, class of exporters and places under sub­-rule (2) of Rule 20 of Central Excise Rules. 2002 for warehousing of excisable goods for the purpose of export . ln paragraph 2(2) of the said Circular.the Board has specified places where warehouses may be established to store excisable goods for export .The Board has received representations from the trade to include Ahmedabad District in the state of Gujarat in the list of places mentioned in the said Circular.

2. The matter has been examined . Board is of the view that extension of the facility of export warehousing to Ahmedabad district in the state of Gujarat would facilitate the trade and Therefore, It has been decided to amend paragraph 2(2) of the Circu lar No. 581/18/2001-CX. dated 29th June, 2001 to include Ahmedabad district in the State of Gujarat. Accordingly, the said paragraph shall now read as follows:

”(2) Places : The warehouses may be established and registered in Bangalore, Kolkata, Chennai Delhi, Hyderabad, Jaipur, Kanpur, Ludhiana, Mumbai, the district of Ahmedabad in the state of Gujarat, the districts of Pune and Raigad in the state of Maharashtra, the district of East Midnapore in the state of West Bengal, the district of Kancheepuram in the state of Tamilnadu, the district of Indore in the state of  Madhya Pradesh, the taluka Ankleshwar in the disirict of Bharuch in the state of Gujarat, Navi Mumbai in the district of Thane in the state of Maharashtra , Sholinghur in the district of Vellore in the Slate of Tamil Nadu, Bidadi in the Bangalore Rural District, Karnataka, the district of Thiruvallur in the state of Tamil Nadu, the district of Gautam Budh Nagar in the state of Uttar Pradesh, the district of Nagpur in the state of Maharashtra, Tehsil of Tijara of Alwar district in the state of Rajasthan and Bhuj Taluka of Kutch District in the state of Gujarat.”

3. The field formations may suitably be Receipt of this Circular may please be acknowledged. Hindi version will follow.

(Shankar Prasad Sarma)
Under Secretary to the Govt. of lndia

Share

Recent Posts

  • Service Tax

Demand set aside as assessee for period covered had discharged tax liability under SVLDRS

High Court sets aside demand notices in respect of a period, for which the assessee had discharged tax liability under…

1 hour ago
  • Income Tax

No addition u/s 68 when there is no fresh receipt of unsecured loans during the year

Addition u/s 68 can not be made applicable where there is no fresh receipt of unsecured loans at all during…

4 hours ago
  • Income Tax

Taxes on sales comprising in turnover to be excluded for estimating net profit

Amount of taxes on sales comprising in turnover to be excluded while computing gross receipts for estimating net profit -…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Capital contribution deposited in assessee’s bank not partnership firm – Addition 69A upheld

Addition u/s 69A confirmed as alleged capital contribution by partners was deposited in bank account of assessee not in account…

1 day ago
  • GST

Bail granted to a CA accused in a GST evasion of more than 40 crores

Allahabad High Court grants bail to Chartered Accountant accused in a GST evasion to the tune of more than 40…

2 days ago
  • Income Tax

Every provision invoked casts a different onus, quoting wrong section prejudice the assessee

Every provision invoked casts a different sort of onus on the assessee – ITAT deleted addition u/s 69 towards bogus…

2 days ago