<?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>2018 (3) TMI 1560 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357857</link>
    <description>Used multifunction digital photocopiers and printers were treated as &quot;other wastes&quot; under the Hazardous and Other Wastes Rules, but not as prohibited waste merely on that basis, so redemption was not barred solely for environmental classification. The import was restricted under the Foreign Trade Policy and required DGFT authorisation, which the importer lacked; that violation remained material and had to be dealt with under the foreign trade regime rather than ignored. The Court also accepted the Tribunal&#039;s approach on extended producer responsibility, annual return, Form 6 and Form 7, and upheld reduction of redemption fine and deletion of penalty under Section 114AA, while leaving foreign trade adjudication to the competent authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Sep 2018 12:46:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=515409" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 1560 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357857</link>
      <description>Used multifunction digital photocopiers and printers were treated as &quot;other wastes&quot; under the Hazardous and Other Wastes Rules, but not as prohibited waste merely on that basis, so redemption was not barred solely for environmental classification. The import was restricted under the Foreign Trade Policy and required DGFT authorisation, which the importer lacked; that violation remained material and had to be dealt with under the foreign trade regime rather than ignored. The Court also accepted the Tribunal&#039;s approach on extended producer responsibility, annual return, Form 6 and Form 7, and upheld reduction of redemption fine and deletion of penalty under Section 114AA, while leaving foreign trade adjudication to the competent authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=357857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>