Toy balloon tariff classification: functional heading prevails over residual rubber and festive article headings, supporting penalties for deliberate ...
Customs valuation using comparable contemporaneous imports can displace declared value, while missing speaking orders require pursuit before competent...
Foreign customs declarations and importer admissions established undervaluation, supporting sequential value redetermination, differential duty, and m...
Customs seizure safeguards prevent detention-based limitation avoidance and invalidate provisional release conditions for imported vehicles under an i...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 of 96556 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 of the 100% EOU, holding that the benefit of N/N. 52/2003-Cus applies to inputs used in manufacture even where wastage exceeds SION norms, provided the inputs are actually used in the production process and waste/scrap is duly cleared on payment of duty and not removed unauthorisedly. Relying on the interpretation of the non-obstante clause in the notification, the Tribunal rejected the Department's view that excess wastage automatically attracted duty or penalty. It held that the Commissioner and the adjudicating authority had erred in demanding customs duty of Rs. 34,555/-, imposing penalty of Rs. 5,000/- and redemption fine of Rs. 20,000/-. All such demands and penalties were set aside, and the appeal was fully allowed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal of the 100% EOU, holding that the benefit of N/N. 52/2003-Cus applies to inputs used in manufacture even where wastage exceeds SION norms, provided the inputs are actually used in the production process and waste/scrap is duly cleared on payment of duty and not removed unauthorisedly. Relying on the interpretation of the non-obstante clause in the notification, the Tribunal rejected the Department's view that excess wastage automatically attracted duty or penalty. It held that the Commissioner and the adjudicating authority had erred in demanding customs duty of Rs. 34,555/-, imposing penalty of Rs. 5,000/- and redemption fine of Rs. 20,000/-. All such demands and penalties were set aside, and the appeal was fully allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.