<?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>2024 (5) TMI 430 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752377</link>
    <description>Imported goods in semi knock-down or unassembled form were treated as plastic toys under CTH 95030030 because, under Rule 2(a) of the General Rules for Interpretation, incomplete articles retaining the essential character of the complete product are classified as that complete product. The restriction under the import policy and the BIS compliance requirement also supported classification as toys rather than independent marketable parts. The record further showed deliberate mis-declaration to obtain lower duty and avoid import restrictions, so suppression of the true nature of the goods justified invocation of the extended limitation period under Section 28(4) of the Customs Act. Past assessments did not bar independent examination of each import.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 May 2024 09:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=752509" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 430 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752377</link>
      <description>Imported goods in semi knock-down or unassembled form were treated as plastic toys under CTH 95030030 because, under Rule 2(a) of the General Rules for Interpretation, incomplete articles retaining the essential character of the complete product are classified as that complete product. The restriction under the import policy and the BIS compliance requirement also supported classification as toys rather than independent marketable parts. The record further showed deliberate mis-declaration to obtain lower duty and avoid import restrictions, so suppression of the true nature of the goods justified invocation of the extended limitation period under Section 28(4) of the Customs Act. Past assessments did not bar independent examination of each import.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752377</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>