Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
A vehicle manufactured in April 2008, registered in the United Kingdom before import, was treated as a new car because the foreign registration was only a technical requirement for movement from the showroom to the port. Applying CBEC Circular No. 1/2005-Customs and the ruling in Rahul Bhandare, CESTAT held that the concessional benefit under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. was rightly extended. Once the import was accepted as that of a new car, confiscation-related proceedings against the vehicle could not survive, and the redemption fine under section 125 was deleted.
A vehicle manufactured in April 2008, registered in the United Kingdom before import, was treated as a new car because the foreign registration was only a technical requirement for movement from the showroom to the port. Applying CBEC Circular No. 1/2005-Customs and the ruling in Rahul Bhandare, CESTAT held that the concessional benefit under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus. was rightly extended. Once the import was accepted as that of a new car, confiscation-related proceedings against the vehicle could not survive, and the redemption fine under section 125 was deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
