<?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>2015 (9) TMI 713 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264045</link>
    <description>Customs exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus for crude palm oil could not be denied on the basis of laboratory reports where the prescribed sampling and storage standards were not followed. The Tribunal treated the test evidence as unreliable because the samples were not drawn or stored in the required manner, the chemical examiners lacked knowledge of the proper method, the samples were kept in plastic bottles rather than steel containers, and testing occurred after significant delay. It also held that the importer&#039;s failure to object at sampling did not amount to waiver of statutory standards. The exemption was therefore available and the assessees were granted consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2015 10:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=397497" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (9) TMI 713 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264045</link>
      <description>Customs exemption under Notification No. 21/2002-Cus for crude palm oil could not be denied on the basis of laboratory reports where the prescribed sampling and storage standards were not followed. The Tribunal treated the test evidence as unreliable because the samples were not drawn or stored in the required manner, the chemical examiners lacked knowledge of the proper method, the samples were kept in plastic bottles rather than steel containers, and testing occurred after significant delay. It also held that the importer&#039;s failure to object at sampling did not amount to waiver of statutory standards. The exemption was therefore available and the assessees were granted consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264045</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>