https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449586 CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal regarding refund claim for differential duty on imported ores. The tribunal held that lower authorities failed to properly classify goods under tariff item 2601 1119, incorrectly denying exemption notification under section 25 of Customs Act, 1962. Authorities relied on inapplicable explanatory notes without evaluating the actual process or Fe content to distinguish between ores and concentrates. The tribunal found no proper methodology was applied to determine classification, noting that theoretical exposition of supplier's activities was speculatively presumed without establishing actual conformity to tariff prescriptions. The appellant's classification was deemed correct, making them eligible for exemption from additional customs duty. en-us Tue, 13 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Feb 2024 18:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449586 CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal regarding refund claim for differential duty on imported ores. The tribunal held that lower authorities failed to properly classify goods under tariff item 2601 1119, incorrectly denying exemption notification under section 25 of Customs Act, 1962. Authorities relied on inapplicable explanatory notes without evaluating the actual process or Fe content to distinguish between ores and concentrates. The tribunal found no proper methodology was applied to determine classification, noting that theoretical exposition of supplier's activities was speculatively presumed without establishing actual conformity to tariff prescriptions. The appellant's classification was deemed correct, making them eligible for exemption from additional customs duty. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 13 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449586