<?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>2016 (3) TMI 295 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325111</link>
    <description>Imported goods were classified as pesticides rather than bio-fertiliser where laboratory testing showed Oxymatrine content and the importers did not dispute reclassification; import without the required registration justified confiscation, redemption fine and penalty for the live consignment. For past clearances, however, the demand failed because the goods had been declared as bio-fertiliser, supported by supplier certificates and contemporaneous customs testing, and no independent evidence showed suppression or misdeclaration to evade duty. Extended limitation and consequential penalties were therefore not sustainable for the earlier consignments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Nov 2016 13:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=419725" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 295 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325111</link>
      <description>Imported goods were classified as pesticides rather than bio-fertiliser where laboratory testing showed Oxymatrine content and the importers did not dispute reclassification; import without the required registration justified confiscation, redemption fine and penalty for the live consignment. For past clearances, however, the demand failed because the goods had been declared as bio-fertiliser, supported by supplier certificates and contemporaneous customs testing, and no independent evidence showed suppression or misdeclaration to evade duty. Extended limitation and consequential penalties were therefore not sustainable for the earlier consignments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325111</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>