Imported seaweed extract provisionally released on bond only; declaratory rejection set aside; appellate decision due within section 128-A(4-A) three ...
Page of 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
9421 to 9440 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that the imported goods are classifiable under CTH 29173920 and thus eligible for the concessional duty under Notification No. 152/2009-CUS; the departmental demand for differential customs duty of Rs. 56,71,510 with interest was held unsustainable. The Tribunal found no proven mis-declaration of goods and accordingly quashed the penalties levied on the Appellant. It held that post-Budget classification under the revised tariff entry did not deprive the Appellant of the notification benefit where identical goods were imported from the same supplier before and after the Budget, and ordered relief in favour of the Appellant.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that the imported goods are classifiable under CTH 29173920 and thus eligible for the concessional duty under Notification No. 152/2009-CUS; the departmental demand for differential customs duty of Rs. 56,71,510 with interest was held unsustainable. The Tribunal found no proven mis-declaration of goods and accordingly quashed the penalties levied on the Appellant. It held that post-Budget classification under the revised tariff entry did not deprive the Appellant of the notification benefit where identical goods were imported from the same supplier before and after the Budget, and ordered relief in favour of the Appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.