<?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>2014 (5) TMI 125 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247198</link>
    <description>Rule 2(a) applies only to complete or finished articles presented unassembled or disassembled, where assembly is limited to simple fixing and no further working is required. Where imported components undergo substantial manufacturing processes such as printing, mounting, soldering, inspection and related work before becoming the final product, they are not classifiable as complete or finished goods in unassembled form. In a separate limitation point, suppression to justify extended duty demand requires material showing misdeclaration or concealment; disclosure of the imported goods in the Bills of Entry and absence of evidence of concealment defeats that allegation. On that reasoning, the Revenue&#039;s classification and limitation objections were rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=354733" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (5) TMI 125 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247198</link>
      <description>Rule 2(a) applies only to complete or finished articles presented unassembled or disassembled, where assembly is limited to simple fixing and no further working is required. Where imported components undergo substantial manufacturing processes such as printing, mounting, soldering, inspection and related work before becoming the final product, they are not classifiable as complete or finished goods in unassembled form. In a separate limitation point, suppression to justify extended duty demand requires material showing misdeclaration or concealment; disclosure of the imported goods in the Bills of Entry and absence of evidence of concealment defeats that allegation. On that reasoning, the Revenue&#039;s classification and limitation objections were rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=247198</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>