<?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 (12) TMI 16 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762436</link>
    <description>Tariff classification of imported goods was examined between heading 3505 for modified starches and heading 3824 for prepared additives for cements, mortars or concretes. Classification had to be made under the General Rules for Interpretation of the Import Tariff, and the revenue bore the burden of proving a departure from the declared heading. The reclassification was found unsustainable because it rested on limited material, did not establish that the goods answered the specific description in heading 3505, and failed to assess the claim that the goods were cement and mortar additives. The classification, duty and penalty determinations were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Dec 2024 10:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=780133" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 16 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762436</link>
      <description>Tariff classification of imported goods was examined between heading 3505 for modified starches and heading 3824 for prepared additives for cements, mortars or concretes. Classification had to be made under the General Rules for Interpretation of the Import Tariff, and the revenue bore the burden of proving a departure from the declared heading. The reclassification was found unsustainable because it rested on limited material, did not establish that the goods answered the specific description in heading 3505, and failed to assess the claim that the goods were cement and mortar additives. The classification, duty and penalty determinations were set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762436</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>