https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196006 The Tribunal allowed all three appeals by M/s. Indokem Ltd., Managing Director, and Senior Manager, emphasizing the accurate disclosure of the chemical formula in the shipping bill as crucial. It was held that there was no misdeclaration as the appellants provided both the generic name and chemical formula, justifying the differing DEPB rates. As the goods were not available for confiscation, the imposition of a redemption fine was deemed unjustified, leading to the dismissal of the confiscation order. The judgment was pronounced on 2-12-2016. en-us Fri, 02 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Nov 2017 06:54:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196006 The Tribunal allowed all three appeals by M/s. Indokem Ltd., Managing Director, and Senior Manager, emphasizing the accurate disclosure of the chemical formula in the shipping bill as crucial. It was held that there was no misdeclaration as the appellants provided both the generic name and chemical formula, justifying the differing DEPB rates. As the goods were not available for confiscation, the imposition of a redemption fine was deemed unjustified, leading to the dismissal of the confiscation order. The judgment was pronounced on 2-12-2016. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 02 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196006