<?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>SC allows appeal, quashes adverse finding of inducing mis-declaration; matter treated as mis-classification, no penalty.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92237</link>
    <description>The SC allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court&#039;s observation that the CESTAT had upheld an original finding that the appellant (CB) had advised the importer to mis-declare goods; the SC held the CESTAT determined the matter to be one of mis-classification rather than mis-declaration, and the adverse finding based on retracted statements was unsustainable. Consequently, the impugned adverse observation in paragraph 6 of the High Court order was declared incorrect and the adjudicatory conclusion that the appellant induced mis-declaration was quashed. The appeal was disposed of in favor of the appellant, with the contested finding removed and no further penalty sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2025 08:10:37 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2025 08:10:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=848280" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>SC allows appeal, quashes adverse finding of inducing mis-declaration; matter treated as mis-classification, no penalty.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92237</link>
      <description>The SC allowed the appeal and set aside the High Court&#039;s observation that the CESTAT had upheld an original finding that the appellant (CB) had advised the importer to mis-declare goods; the SC held the CESTAT determined the matter to be one of mis-classification rather than mis-declaration, and the adverse finding based on retracted statements was unsustainable. Consequently, the impugned adverse observation in paragraph 6 of the High Court order was declared incorrect and the adjudicatory conclusion that the appellant induced mis-declaration was quashed. The appeal was disposed of in favor of the appellant, with the contested finding removed and no further penalty sustained.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2025 08:10:37 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92237</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>