<?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>1995 (5) TMI 108 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84194</link>
    <description>Imported graphite was not shown on the record to be natural graphite of Sri Lankan origin for classification under Heading 25.01/32 or for refund of duty. The assessee had to prove both the nature of the goods and their origin, but the original certificate of country of origin and other primary supporting documents were not produced. The Bill of Entry had been destroyed, the Customs-attested invoice was unavailable, and the chemical examiner&#039;s report only confirmed that the sample was a black powder essentially of graphite and not activated carbon. On that material, the refund claim remained unsubstantiated and the lower authorities&#039; findings were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 May 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2011 12:49:13 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=121338" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1995 (5) TMI 108 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84194</link>
      <description>Imported graphite was not shown on the record to be natural graphite of Sri Lankan origin for classification under Heading 25.01/32 or for refund of duty. The assessee had to prove both the nature of the goods and their origin, but the original certificate of country of origin and other primary supporting documents were not produced. The Bill of Entry had been destroyed, the Customs-attested invoice was unavailable, and the chemical examiner&#039;s report only confirmed that the sample was a black powder essentially of graphite and not activated carbon. On that material, the refund claim remained unsubstantiated and the lower authorities&#039; findings were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 May 1995 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=84194</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>