<?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>2020 (2) TMI 1602 - CESTAT  MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300050</link>
    <description>Imported graphite tubes used in heat exchangers for an MSFE system qualified for concessional customs duty where the goods were received in the factory, subjected to preparatory processing, and then cleared for installation at the customer&#039;s site because of their fragile nature. The technical objection that final fitting did not occur inside the factory did not defeat the exemption, since the goods were used in the manufacturing chain in substance and spirit. The extended period of limitation was also unavailable because the importer had disclosed receipt and intended use to the Department and there was no suppression or misdeclaration. The duty demand, confiscation and penalty were therefore not sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2022 08:34:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=666735" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 1602 - CESTAT  MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300050</link>
      <description>Imported graphite tubes used in heat exchangers for an MSFE system qualified for concessional customs duty where the goods were received in the factory, subjected to preparatory processing, and then cleared for installation at the customer&#039;s site because of their fragile nature. The technical objection that final fitting did not occur inside the factory did not defeat the exemption, since the goods were used in the manufacturing chain in substance and spirit. The extended period of limitation was also unavailable because the importer had disclosed receipt and intended use to the Department and there was no suppression or misdeclaration. The duty demand, confiscation and penalty were therefore not sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300050</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>