<?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>PVC Resin Anti-dumping Duty Dispute: Importer Wins Based on Documentary Evidence Over Packing Discrepancy.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=82824</link>
    <description>The case pertains to the demand of anti-dumping duty on PVC Resin SG 5 imported from China. The appellant claimed to have imported the goods from &quot;CNSG Jilantai Salt Chlori-Alkali Chemical Co. Ltd,&quot; while the bags bore the name &quot;CNSG Jilantai Chlori-Alkali Chemical Co. Ltd,&quot; with the word &quot;salt&quot; missing. The CESTAT held that the documentary evidence, including the invoice, packing list, and certificate of origin, takes precedence over assumptions/suspicions arising from the packing. Relying on a previous case involving a similar issue, the CESTAT accepted the documentary evidence as adequate proof that &quot;Alkali Company&quot; was the producer and allowed the benefit of the concessional rate to the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Nov 2024 08:34:25 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Nov 2024 08:34:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=776687" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>PVC Resin Anti-dumping Duty Dispute: Importer Wins Based on Documentary Evidence Over Packing Discrepancy.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=82824</link>
      <description>The case pertains to the demand of anti-dumping duty on PVC Resin SG 5 imported from China. The appellant claimed to have imported the goods from &quot;CNSG Jilantai Salt Chlori-Alkali Chemical Co. Ltd,&quot; while the bags bore the name &quot;CNSG Jilantai Chlori-Alkali Chemical Co. Ltd,&quot; with the word &quot;salt&quot; missing. The CESTAT held that the documentary evidence, including the invoice, packing list, and certificate of origin, takes precedence over assumptions/suspicions arising from the packing. Relying on a previous case involving a similar issue, the CESTAT accepted the documentary evidence as adequate proof that &quot;Alkali Company&quot; was the producer and allowed the benefit of the concessional rate to the appellant.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Nov 2024 08:34:25 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=82824</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>