<?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>2009 (1) TMI 253 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34837</link>
    <description>Boric Acid imported for a restricted use was held confiscable under the Customs Act, 1962 because no prescribed import permit from the Central Insecticide Board and Registration Committee was produced, and the import was not shown to fall within any exempt non-insecticidal category. Nickel Chloride and Copper Sulphate, however, were treated as goods intended for the EOU&#039;s manufacturing process rather than insecticidal use, so the basis for their confiscation was not established. The confiscation of those items and the consequential penalty were set aside, and penalty was remanded for fresh consideration in light of the limited liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73450" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (1) TMI 253 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34837</link>
      <description>Boric Acid imported for a restricted use was held confiscable under the Customs Act, 1962 because no prescribed import permit from the Central Insecticide Board and Registration Committee was produced, and the import was not shown to fall within any exempt non-insecticidal category. Nickel Chloride and Copper Sulphate, however, were treated as goods intended for the EOU&#039;s manufacturing process rather than insecticidal use, so the basis for their confiscation was not established. The confiscation of those items and the consequential penalty were set aside, and penalty was remanded for fresh consideration in light of the limited liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34837</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>