Deductibility for charitable donations affirmed where payments to approved relief funds, even if CSR-driven, qualify under the donation deduction sche...
Mis-declaration in import descriptions must be deliberate to justify confiscation; withheld contemporaneous import documents invalidate value redeterm...
Liability for EPCG export shortfall: duty and interest sustained, but confiscation and penalties quashed where no fraud and causes beyond importer con...
Imported goods described as a cross-ply unidirectional laminate of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene fibres for ballistic protection were held classifiable under CTH 540730, not CTH 39201099, because Chapter 54 and the relevant HSN notes more accurately covered the product than the plastics heading in Chapter 39. The resulting differential customs duty demand with interest was sustained. However, the Tribunal held that a mere dispute over tariff classification did not by itself establish misdeclaration under section 111(m), where the description of the goods in the Bills of Entry was not in dispute. On that basis, confiscation and the consequential penalty under section 112 were set aside.
Imported goods described as a cross-ply unidirectional laminate of ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene fibres for ballistic protection were held classifiable under CTH 540730, not CTH 39201099, because Chapter 54 and the relevant HSN notes more accurately covered the product than the plastics heading in Chapter 39. The resulting differential customs duty demand with interest was sustained. However, the Tribunal held that a mere dispute over tariff classification did not by itself establish misdeclaration under section 111(m), where the description of the goods in the Bills of Entry was not in dispute. On that basis, confiscation and the consequential penalty under section 112 were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
