The accused denied bail over alleged GST credential misuse to commit Rs.1,09,11,404 fraud involving multiple proprietorships; investigation to continu...
CESTAT dismissed the revenue's appeal and directed refund/relief to the importer. The Tribunal held that the notification imposing anti-dumping duty was previously set aside by CESTAT and, even if the revenue's grounds were accepted, s.9A(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 terminates an anti-dumping duty five years after imposition unless validly extended. No valid subsequent notification extending Notification No.12/2010-ADD beyond 19.02.2015 was produced; consequently anti-dumping duty under that notification could not lawfully be levied on imports entered under B/E dated 13.06.2017. The appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.
CESTAT dismissed the revenue's appeal and directed refund/relief to the importer. The Tribunal held that the notification imposing anti-dumping duty was previously set aside by CESTAT and, even if the revenue's grounds were accepted, s.9A(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 terminates an anti-dumping duty five years after imposition unless validly extended. No valid subsequent notification extending Notification No.12/2010-ADD beyond 19.02.2015 was produced; consequently anti-dumping duty under that notification could not lawfully be levied on imports entered under B/E dated 13.06.2017. The appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
