<?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 (4) TMI 511 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121853</link>
    <description>The appeal considered the liability to pay Special Additional Duty (SAD) under Section 3A of the Customs Tariff Act on goods imported, warehoused before 2-6-98, and cleared for home consumption after that date. The court upheld the lower authorities&#039; decision against the appellants based on the Supreme Court&#039;s precedent in Kiran Spinning Mills v. CC [1999 (113) E.L.T. 753 (S.C.)]. It was determined that the taxable event for customs duty occurs when goods cross the customs barrier, i.e., upon clearance for home consumption, post the date when SAD became leviable. The appellants were held liable to pay the duty, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Aug 2012 17:02:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=158845" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (4) TMI 511 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121853</link>
      <description>The appeal considered the liability to pay Special Additional Duty (SAD) under Section 3A of the Customs Tariff Act on goods imported, warehoused before 2-6-98, and cleared for home consumption after that date. The court upheld the lower authorities&#039; decision against the appellants based on the Supreme Court&#039;s precedent in Kiran Spinning Mills v. CC [1999 (113) E.L.T. 753 (S.C.)]. It was determined that the taxable event for customs duty occurs when goods cross the customs barrier, i.e., upon clearance for home consumption, post the date when SAD became leviable. The appellants were held liable to pay the duty, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=121853</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>