<?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>2013 (8) TMI 955 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178541</link>
    <description>Imported crude palm oil classification depends on whether the scientific test results establish compliance with edible-grade standards and the conditions for concessional duty. Where Customs drew samples, the Chemical Examiner tested them within a proximate period, and the importer did not seek retesting, cross-examine the examiner, or produce technical evidence that delay would alter acid value or carotenoid content, the Chemical Examiner&#039;s report may be preferred over the PHO report. The applicable standards under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules required the oil to meet prescribed limits, and the evidence supported reliance on the Chemical Examiner&#039;s findings. The consignments were therefore not entitled to edible-grade treatment for concessional duty, and differential duty was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2016 14:48:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=415781" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (8) TMI 955 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178541</link>
      <description>Imported crude palm oil classification depends on whether the scientific test results establish compliance with edible-grade standards and the conditions for concessional duty. Where Customs drew samples, the Chemical Examiner tested them within a proximate period, and the importer did not seek retesting, cross-examine the examiner, or produce technical evidence that delay would alter acid value or carotenoid content, the Chemical Examiner&#039;s report may be preferred over the PHO report. The applicable standards under the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules required the oil to meet prescribed limits, and the evidence supported reliance on the Chemical Examiner&#039;s findings. The consignments were therefore not entitled to edible-grade treatment for concessional duty, and differential duty was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178541</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>