<?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>2007 (5) TMI 460 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121763</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery for penalty amounts imposed on appellants for mis-declaration and mis-classification of imported &#039;non-alloy steel skull scrap&#039; with &#039;slag&#039; content, allowing unconditional clearance based on importer&#039;s declaration. The Tribunal found the item should have been classified under Heading 72.04 without the &#039;slag&#039;. It noted the distinction between &#039;skull scrap&#039; and &#039;scull scrap&#039;, granting relief due to factual errors and technical evidence presented. An expedited appeal disposal was scheduled to address the unjustifiable withholding of part of the consignment promptly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 12:01:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158755" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 460 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121763</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery for penalty amounts imposed on appellants for mis-declaration and mis-classification of imported &#039;non-alloy steel skull scrap&#039; with &#039;slag&#039; content, allowing unconditional clearance based on importer&#039;s declaration. The Tribunal found the item should have been classified under Heading 72.04 without the &#039;slag&#039;. It noted the distinction between &#039;skull scrap&#039; and &#039;scull scrap&#039;, granting relief due to factual errors and technical evidence presented. An expedited appeal disposal was scheduled to address the unjustifiable withholding of part of the consignment promptly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121763</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>