Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand of differential customs duty, interest and consequential liabilities raised on the basis of the enhanced tariff value notified on 31.05.2013. It held that although the notification was published in the Gazette on 31.05.2013, it was not available or operationally accessible at the time of assessment and out-of-charge of the appellant's Bill of Entry on the same date, which had correctly applied the then-prevailing tariff value. CESTAT held that no misdeclaration could be alleged where the importer followed the tariff value in force at the time of assessment and where the system itself was not updated. The subsequent show cause notice, issued after substantial delay, was also held to be time-barred. Consequently, the impugned order was quashed and all demands were annulled.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
