https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352023 Combine harvester parts imported under two invoices were held classifiable under heading 84339000 after applying Rules 1 and 3 of the General Rules for Interpretation of the Customs Tariff, with the competing descriptions resolved in favour of the applicable tariff entry. The Chartered Engineer's report was not treated as conclusive to show that the goods were merely of general use. Because the dispute was one of classification and interpretation, not deliberate misdeclaration, confiscation under section 111(m) was not justified; redemption fine and penalty therefore also could not be sustained. The impugned order was set aside and consequential relief followed. en-us Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Feb 2019 16:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352023 Combine harvester parts imported under two invoices were held classifiable under heading 84339000 after applying Rules 1 and 3 of the General Rules for Interpretation of the Customs Tariff, with the competing descriptions resolved in favour of the applicable tariff entry. The Chartered Engineer's report was not treated as conclusive to show that the goods were merely of general use. Because the dispute was one of classification and interpretation, not deliberate misdeclaration, confiscation under section 111(m) was not justified; redemption fine and penalty therefore also could not be sustained. The impugned order was set aside and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 30 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352023