Common portal notice after GST registration cancellation was insufficient; physical service and hearing were required before adjudication could procee...
Roasted arecanut was held classifiable under CTH 20081920 because the advance ruling in the importer's own case remained binding on the Department in the absence of any stay, and the court-directed laboratory report showing moisture content of 2.09% supported classification as roasted arecanut. Applying the Madras High Court ratio that goods with moisture below 10% qualify as roasted arecanut, the Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner (Appeals). As the goods were correctly classified, the allegation of misdeclaration failed, confiscation under Sections 111(d) and 111(m) was unsustainable, and the penalty was set aside.
Roasted arecanut was held classifiable under CTH 20081920 because the advance ruling in the importer's own case remained binding on the Department in the absence of any stay, and the court-directed laboratory report showing moisture content of 2.09% supported classification as roasted arecanut. Applying the Madras High Court ratio that goods with moisture below 10% qualify as roasted arecanut, the Tribunal affirmed the Commissioner (Appeals). As the goods were correctly classified, the allegation of misdeclaration failed, confiscation under Sections 111(d) and 111(m) was unsustainable, and the penalty was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
