<?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>Export unit wins appeal on bus bar classification and duty recovery without proven diversion from manufacturing use</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90104</link>
    <description>CESTAT allowed appellant&#039;s appeal challenging classification and duty recovery on imported bus bars. The Export Oriented Unit imported goods under concessional duty exemption notification claiming classification under Chapter 85 as switchgear parts rather than tariff item 7407 1030. The tribunal held that customs authorities lacked jurisdiction to recover differential duty absent proven diversion from intended manufacturing use. For 169 bills entries from July 2018, no allegation existed of goods being used contrary to exemption conditions or cleared domestically without export. Classification accepted at import was final upon deployment for production. Regarding live consignment, presumption of eventual violation was legally impermissible......</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:38:46 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:38:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=833677" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Export unit wins appeal on bus bar classification and duty recovery without proven diversion from manufacturing use</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90104</link>
      <description>CESTAT allowed appellant&#039;s appeal challenging classification and duty recovery on imported bus bars. The Export Oriented Unit imported goods under concessional duty exemption notification claiming classification under Chapter 85 as switchgear parts rather than tariff item 7407 1030. The tribunal held that customs authorities lacked jurisdiction to recover differential duty absent proven diversion from intended manufacturing use. For 169 bills entries from July 2018, no allegation existed of goods being used contrary to exemption conditions or cleared domestically without export. Classification accepted at import was final upon deployment for production. Regarding live consignment, presumption of eventual violation was legally impermissible......</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2025 08:38:46 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=90104</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>