<?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 (7) TMI 1471 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775403</link>
    <description>The CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal, setting aside the order imposing anti-dumping duty on aluminum alloy wheels imported from China. The tribunal found no evidence that the appellant mis-declared the country of origin or evaded anti-dumping duty on 30 bills of entry under investigation. The record did not show imports from the suspected Taiwanese company, and the certificate of origin suspected to be forged pertained to a different transshipment unrelated to the appellant. Additionally, the assessments on the goods were finalized within the limitation period, with no reassessment done. Consequently, the goods did not attract anti-dumping duty, and the appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Jul 2025 08:28:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=838536" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (7) TMI 1471 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775403</link>
      <description>The CESTAT Mumbai allowed the appeal, setting aside the order imposing anti-dumping duty on aluminum alloy wheels imported from China. The tribunal found no evidence that the appellant mis-declared the country of origin or evaded anti-dumping duty on 30 bills of entry under investigation. The record did not show imports from the suspected Taiwanese company, and the certificate of origin suspected to be forged pertained to a different transshipment unrelated to the appellant. Additionally, the assessments on the goods were finalized within the limitation period, with no reassessment done. Consequently, the goods did not attract anti-dumping duty, and the appellant&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775403</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>