https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173340 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the department, upholding the demand for differential CVD against the appellant, an importer of brushless fans. The appellant's argument that they should not be subject to packaged commodity rules as they sold products to industrial consumers and manufacturers, not retail markets, was rejected. The Tribunal classified the appellant as a trader for the purpose of packaged commodity rules, affirming the demand and penalty. However, the Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit a specified amount within a set timeframe, with a waiver of pre-deposit for the balance dues during the appeal process. en-us Fri, 14 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 14 Sep 2015 06:52:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173340 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the department, upholding the demand for differential CVD against the appellant, an importer of brushless fans. The appellant's argument that they should not be subject to packaged commodity rules as they sold products to industrial consumers and manufacturers, not retail markets, was rejected. The Tribunal classified the appellant as a trader for the purpose of packaged commodity rules, affirming the demand and penalty. However, the Tribunal directed the appellant to deposit a specified amount within a set timeframe, with a waiver of pre-deposit for the balance dues during the appeal process. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 14 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173340