https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271042 An export notification for Basmati Rice was denied where the goods did not answer that commodity description, even though the notified grain-length and length-to-breadth ratio conditions were met. The authorities were entitled to verify variety identification through test material and AGMARK-based reference, and the adverse test result justified denial of the export benefit. Confiscation and redemption fine were sustained because clearance pending testing did not prevent confiscation consequences once the goods were found liable. A separate remand for penalty under section 114AA was set aside as unnecessary on these facts, giving the exporter only partial relief. en-us Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 May 2016 18:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271042 An export notification for Basmati Rice was denied where the goods did not answer that commodity description, even though the notified grain-length and length-to-breadth ratio conditions were met. The authorities were entitled to verify variety identification through test material and AGMARK-based reference, and the adverse test result justified denial of the export benefit. Confiscation and redemption fine were sustained because clearance pending testing did not prevent confiscation consequences once the goods were found liable. A separate remand for penalty under section 114AA was set aside as unnecessary on these facts, giving the exporter only partial relief. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 26 Nov 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271042