https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119427 The appeal was against the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Hyderabad's Order-in-Original regarding the classification of imported goods as "Aluminium Scrap-tread" under CETH 76020010 and 760210 for exemption under Notification No. 21/2002 Sl. No. 495. The goods were confiscated under Sections 111(d) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962, with revised classification to 76020090. The Tribunal acknowledged technical violations but reduced penalties due to the importer's lack of malafide intent and ignorance of policy, ultimately lowering fines imposed on the appellant based on the importer's inexperience and reliance on exporter-supplied documents. en-us Thu, 16 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 11 Jul 2012 10:55:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119427 The appeal was against the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Hyderabad's Order-in-Original regarding the classification of imported goods as "Aluminium Scrap-tread" under CETH 76020010 and 760210 for exemption under Notification No. 21/2002 Sl. No. 495. The goods were confiscated under Sections 111(d) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962, with revised classification to 76020090. The Tribunal acknowledged technical violations but reduced penalties due to the importer's lack of malafide intent and ignorance of policy, ultimately lowering fines imposed on the appellant based on the importer's inexperience and reliance on exporter-supplied documents. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 16 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=119427