<?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>2003 (5) TMI 367 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108491</link>
    <description>The tribunal waived the duty and penalty imposed on the applicant for the imported product, Rovimix B2 80 SD, as it should have been classified under Heading 23.02 for animal feeding preparations instead of Heading 29.36 of the Customs Tariff. This decision was made due to the Commissioner (Appeals) not adequately examining the issue. Recovery of the duty and penalty was stayed in this case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Mar 2012 18:15:33 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=145508" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (5) TMI 367 - CEGAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108491</link>
      <description>The tribunal waived the duty and penalty imposed on the applicant for the imported product, Rovimix B2 80 SD, as it should have been classified under Heading 23.02 for animal feeding preparations instead of Heading 29.36 of the Customs Tariff. This decision was made due to the Commissioner (Appeals) not adequately examining the issue. Recovery of the duty and penalty was stayed in this case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108491</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>