<?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 (6) TMI 200 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753593</link>
    <description>Imported goods were held to fall within pre-sensitized positive offset aluminum plates rather than digital offset printing plates, because the evidence did not show that the image was created by digital means and the test and inspection material supported the importer&#039;s classification. On that basis, the goods were treated as assessable under Notification No. 25/2014-Customs (ADD). Misdeclaration of Taiwan as the country of origin was nevertheless found to be deliberate, since the goods were in fact of Chinese origin and the declaration was used to evade higher anti-dumping duty. Confiscation and penalty were upheld, but the duty and consequential penalties were directed to be recalculated on the correct notification basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2024 12:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=755461" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (6) TMI 200 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753593</link>
      <description>Imported goods were held to fall within pre-sensitized positive offset aluminum plates rather than digital offset printing plates, because the evidence did not show that the image was created by digital means and the test and inspection material supported the importer&#039;s classification. On that basis, the goods were treated as assessable under Notification No. 25/2014-Customs (ADD). Misdeclaration of Taiwan as the country of origin was nevertheless found to be deliberate, since the goods were in fact of Chinese origin and the declaration was used to evade higher anti-dumping duty. Confiscation and penalty were upheld, but the duty and consequential penalties were directed to be recalculated on the correct notification basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Jun 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=753593</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>