https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280867 The Tribunal determined that the appellants, who purchased the vessel for breaking-up and accepted customs duty liability, were not the importers. Instead, the entity transferring the vessel, Shipping Corporation of India (SCI), was deemed the importer. Relying on legal precedents and notifications, the Tribunal emphasized that the date of transfer for breaking, not the date of beaching, should be considered for customs duty assessment. Consequently, the duty demand on the appellants was found unsustainable, highlighting the significance of legal interpretations and precedents in resolving customs duty disputes related to imported vessels for breaking-up. en-us Wed, 17 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 May 2019 17:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280867 The Tribunal determined that the appellants, who purchased the vessel for breaking-up and accepted customs duty liability, were not the importers. Instead, the entity transferring the vessel, Shipping Corporation of India (SCI), was deemed the importer. Relying on legal precedents and notifications, the Tribunal emphasized that the date of transfer for breaking, not the date of beaching, should be considered for customs duty assessment. Consequently, the duty demand on the appellants was found unsustainable, highlighting the significance of legal interpretations and precedents in resolving customs duty disputes related to imported vessels for breaking-up. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 17 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280867