https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773171 CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal challenging classification of imported LED panels and components. The Revenue sought to classify the goods as complete television sets to deny exemption benefits under N/N. 12/2012-Cus, but failed to provide evidence through proper examination and inventory of the 171 consignments. The Tribunal held that Rule 2 of General Rules for Interpretation requires actual evidence that goods can be assembled into finished products through basic operations. Without proper examination records or proof of assembly capability, the goods including LED panels were entitled to exemption benefits. The order imposing differential duty, penalties and confiscation was set aside as legally unsustainable. en-us Fri, 06 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jun 2025 08:29:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773171 CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal challenging classification of imported LED panels and components. The Revenue sought to classify the goods as complete television sets to deny exemption benefits under N/N. 12/2012-Cus, but failed to provide evidence through proper examination and inventory of the 171 consignments. The Tribunal held that Rule 2 of General Rules for Interpretation requires actual evidence that goods can be assembled into finished products through basic operations. Without proper examination records or proof of assembly capability, the goods including LED panels were entitled to exemption benefits. The order imposing differential duty, penalties and confiscation was set aside as legally unsustainable. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 06 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773171