Just a moment...
We've upgraded AI Search on TaxTMI with two powerful modes:
1. Basic
• Quick overview summary answering your query with references
• Category-wise results to explore all relevant documents on TaxTMI
2. Advanced
• Includes everything in Basic
• Detailed report covering:
- Overview Summary
- Governing Provisions [Acts, Notifications, Circulars]
- Relevant Case Laws
- Tariff / Classification / HSN
- Expert views from TaxTMI
- Practical Guidance with immediate steps and dispute strategy
• Also highlights how each document is relevant to your query, helping you quickly understand key insights without reading the full text.
Help Us Improve - by giving the rating with each AI Result:
Powered by Weblekha - Building Scalable Websites
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
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.