<?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>Tribunal Confirms Appellant&#039;s PVC Resin Classification; Dismisses Higher Anti-Dumping Duty Claim by Customs Department.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75863</link>
    <description>Anti-dumping duty - Re-assessment of imported goods - Classification of Import of 30 MT of PVC Resin SG 5 (Suspension Grade) - Verification of Manufacturer - The Tribunal examined the evidence provided by both parties, including invoices, packing lists, and certificates of origin. They concluded that the evidence overwhelmingly supported the Appellant&#039;s claim regarding the manufacturer of the goods. - Despite discrepancies in the markings on the bags, the court found that the documents provided by the Appellant were sufficient to establish the manufacturer&#039;s identity. - The CESTAT upheld the Appellant&#039;s classification of the goods and rejected the Customs Department&#039;s argument for a higher anti-dumping duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2024 09:16:32 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2024 09:16:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=747540" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tribunal Confirms Appellant&#039;s PVC Resin Classification; Dismisses Higher Anti-Dumping Duty Claim by Customs Department.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75863</link>
      <description>Anti-dumping duty - Re-assessment of imported goods - Classification of Import of 30 MT of PVC Resin SG 5 (Suspension Grade) - Verification of Manufacturer - The Tribunal examined the evidence provided by both parties, including invoices, packing lists, and certificates of origin. They concluded that the evidence overwhelmingly supported the Appellant&#039;s claim regarding the manufacturer of the goods. - Despite discrepancies in the markings on the bags, the court found that the documents provided by the Appellant were sufficient to establish the manufacturer&#039;s identity. - The CESTAT upheld the Appellant&#039;s classification of the goods and rejected the Customs Department&#039;s argument for a higher anti-dumping duty.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2024 09:16:32 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75863</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>