<?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>2021 (11) TMI 960 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415179</link>
    <description>Incomplete imported LED strands were classifiable by their essential character as lighting sets under heading 9405 30 00, not as light-emitting diodes under heading 8541 10 00, because Rule 2(a) treats incomplete articles having the essential character of the complete article as complete. The exemption under Notification No. 24/2005-Cus was unavailable since it applied only to goods under heading 8541. Confiscation under Sections 111(d) and 111(m) did not survive because no clear import prohibition was shown on the facts and the declaration was not false, only incomplete or vague; accordingly, redemption fine also failed. Penalty under Section 112(a)(ii) was likewise not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Nov 2021 08:58:52 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=662287" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (11) TMI 960 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415179</link>
      <description>Incomplete imported LED strands were classifiable by their essential character as lighting sets under heading 9405 30 00, not as light-emitting diodes under heading 8541 10 00, because Rule 2(a) treats incomplete articles having the essential character of the complete article as complete. The exemption under Notification No. 24/2005-Cus was unavailable since it applied only to goods under heading 8541. Confiscation under Sections 111(d) and 111(m) did not survive because no clear import prohibition was shown on the facts and the declaration was not false, only incomplete or vague; accordingly, redemption fine also failed. Penalty under Section 112(a)(ii) was likewise not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Nov 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=415179</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>