Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Appellate recourse remained available where a superior officer had assumed functions ordinarily exercised by the proper officer, because such assumption did not extinguish the normal appeal mechanism. The Tribunal further held that the imported goods were not shown to fall within the Steel and Steel Products (Quality Control) Order, 2020 entries requiring BIS certification, so confiscation under section 111(d) for breach of import prohibition could not stand. Misdescription was also not established, as the goods remained classifiable under the same tariff item and the record did not prove intent to evade duty. The declared transaction value could not be rejected without a lawful rule 12 basis and sequential valuation under the valuation rules, so enhancement was unsustainable.
Appellate recourse remained available where a superior officer had assumed functions ordinarily exercised by the proper officer, because such assumption did not extinguish the normal appeal mechanism. The Tribunal further held that the imported goods were not shown to fall within the Steel and Steel Products (Quality Control) Order, 2020 entries requiring BIS certification, so confiscation under section 111(d) for breach of import prohibition could not stand. Misdescription was also not established, as the goods remained classifiable under the same tariff item and the record did not prove intent to evade duty. The declared transaction value could not be rejected without a lawful rule 12 basis and sequential valuation under the valuation rules, so enhancement was unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
