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" ?
Denial of SAFTA preferential treatment arose from questions...
Denial of Preferential Treatment under SAFTA overturned where unchallenged Country of Origin certificate warranted exemption under Notification benefit
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Denial of SAFTA preferential treatment arose from questions about authenticity and verification of a Country of Origin certificate and classification of imported crude soyabean oil. The Tribunal found the certificate was produced, not rejected as fake, and no conclusive adverse report was obtained from the issuing authority; applying the presumption of genuineness and relevant precedent, the appellant was held entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 99/2011. Consequently the impugned order denying exemption was set aside and the appeal allowed with consequential relief.
Denial of SAFTA preferential treatment arose from questions about authenticity and verification of a Country of Origin certificate and classification of imported crude soyabean oil. The Tribunal found the certificate was produced, not rejected as fake, and no conclusive adverse report was obtained from the issuing authority; applying the presumption of genuineness and relevant precedent, the appellant was held entitled to the benefit of Notification No. 99/2011. Consequently the impugned order denying exemption was set aside and the appeal allowed with consequential relief.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.