<?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>2024 (7) TMI 1689 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463705</link>
    <description>Clear float glass with a microscopically thin tin layer was held classifiable under CTH 70051090 as non-wired glass having an absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer, rather than the residuary CTH 70052990. On that classification, the exemption under Sl. No. 934 of Notification No. 46/2011-Cus became available, and the recorded Malaysian origin and supporting certificate satisfied the origin requirement. The dispute was treated as a tariff-interpretation issue, so absent positive suppression, fraud, collusion or wilful misstatement, the extended limitation period could not be invoked; the confiscation, redemption fine and penalties were therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 29 Nov 2025 11:52:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=850140" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 1689 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463705</link>
      <description>Clear float glass with a microscopically thin tin layer was held classifiable under CTH 70051090 as non-wired glass having an absorbent, reflecting or non-reflecting layer, rather than the residuary CTH 70052990. On that classification, the exemption under Sl. No. 934 of Notification No. 46/2011-Cus became available, and the recorded Malaysian origin and supporting certificate satisfied the origin requirement. The dispute was treated as a tariff-interpretation issue, so absent positive suppression, fraud, collusion or wilful misstatement, the extended limitation period could not be invoked; the confiscation, redemption fine and penalties were therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463705</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>