<?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>2025 (5) TMI 2010 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771738</link>
    <description>A chemical preparation used in the manufacture of nickel cadmium batteries was held not classifiable under Chapter Heading 28254000, because it was not a separately classifiable chemically defined compound within Chapter 28; it was treated instead as a residual tariff item under Heading 38249900, and the exemption linked to the Chapter 28 claim was denied. On penalty and limitation, the dispute was treated as a bona fide classification controversy without mala fide intent, so confiscation, penalty and extended limitation were held unsustainable. The duty liability therefore survived only on the basis of the rejected classification for the normal period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 May 2025 08:55:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=825497" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 2010 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771738</link>
      <description>A chemical preparation used in the manufacture of nickel cadmium batteries was held not classifiable under Chapter Heading 28254000, because it was not a separately classifiable chemically defined compound within Chapter 28; it was treated instead as a residual tariff item under Heading 38249900, and the exemption linked to the Chapter 28 claim was denied. On penalty and limitation, the dispute was treated as a bona fide classification controversy without mala fide intent, so confiscation, penalty and extended limitation were held unsustainable. The duty liability therefore survived only on the basis of the rejected classification for the normal period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771738</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>