<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (8) TMI 439 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76103</link>
    <description>Imported Weak Coking Coal qualified for exemption under Notification No. 11/97-Cus. because the available evidence consistently showed ash content below 12%. The Load Port certificate and discharge-port SGS report were based on recognised testing methods and supported the importer&#039;s claim, while the Revenue&#039;s contrary laboratory reports were found unreliable: the sample remained in custody for months before testing, its description differed from the imported goods, the Customs House Laboratory and CFRI reports were inconsistent, and CFRI noted the sample was not representative under IS standards. The denial of exemption on the basis of those reports was therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Jun 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114325" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (8) TMI 439 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76103</link>
      <description>Imported Weak Coking Coal qualified for exemption under Notification No. 11/97-Cus. because the available evidence consistently showed ash content below 12%. The Load Port certificate and discharge-port SGS report were based on recognised testing methods and supported the importer&#039;s claim, while the Revenue&#039;s contrary laboratory reports were found unreliable: the sample remained in custody for months before testing, its description differed from the imported goods, the Customs House Laboratory and CFRI reports were inconsistent, and CFRI noted the sample was not representative under IS standards. The denial of exemption on the basis of those reports was therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=76103</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>