<?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 (8) TMI 266 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756562</link>
    <description>The CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed an appeal challenging denial of FTA benefits on cocoa powder imports from Malaysia. Customs authorities denied benefits under the notification citing intelligence that required 35% value addition was not fulfilled. The tribunal held that to displace a certificate of origin issued by Malaysian authorities, Indian Customs must conduct verification through proper channels with issuing authorities for retroactive checks. Since no such verification report was produced and the requirement under Annexure-III of the FTA was not complied with, the denial was unsustainable. The decision followed precedent from SHIRAZEE TRADERS case with identical facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Aug 2024 07:49:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=762965" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 266 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756562</link>
      <description>The CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed an appeal challenging denial of FTA benefits on cocoa powder imports from Malaysia. Customs authorities denied benefits under the notification citing intelligence that required 35% value addition was not fulfilled. The tribunal held that to displace a certificate of origin issued by Malaysian authorities, Indian Customs must conduct verification through proper channels with issuing authorities for retroactive checks. Since no such verification report was produced and the requirement under Annexure-III of the FTA was not complied with, the denial was unsustainable. The decision followed precedent from SHIRAZEE TRADERS case with identical facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756562</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>