https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325036 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order, allowing the clearance of goods after mutilation under customs supervision. It rejected the Revenue's appeal, finding no misdeclaration by the respondent and emphasizing the binding nature of jurisdictional High Court rulings and the importance of using approved laboratories for testing. The decision reaffirmed the principles established in previous cases, ensuring consistency in the application of the law. en-us Mon, 22 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Nov 2016 12:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325036 The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) order, allowing the clearance of goods after mutilation under customs supervision. It rejected the Revenue's appeal, finding no misdeclaration by the respondent and emphasizing the binding nature of jurisdictional High Court rulings and the importance of using approved laboratories for testing. The decision reaffirmed the principles established in previous cases, ensuring consistency in the application of the law. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 22 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325036