<?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>2012 (12) TMI 111 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219096</link>
    <description>The case involved a dispute over the misdeclaration of goods exported as alloy steel to evade customs duty. The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal determined that the goods were non-alloy steel billets based on test results from the National Metallurgical Laboratory, indicating misdeclaration. The Tribunal highlighted the discrepancy in test reports from different laboratories, emphasizing the reliance on accurate chemical test results for tariff determination. It noted the error margin in test results and criticized the Revenue&#039;s testing methodology, ultimately upholding the decision based on the laboratory&#039;s findings and dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Aug 2013 16:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=192466" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (12) TMI 111 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219096</link>
      <description>The case involved a dispute over the misdeclaration of goods exported as alloy steel to evade customs duty. The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal determined that the goods were non-alloy steel billets based on test results from the National Metallurgical Laboratory, indicating misdeclaration. The Tribunal highlighted the discrepancy in test reports from different laboratories, emphasizing the reliance on accurate chemical test results for tariff determination. It noted the error margin in test results and criticized the Revenue&#039;s testing methodology, ultimately upholding the decision based on the laboratory&#039;s findings and dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=219096</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>