https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779057 CESTAT set aside the adjudicating order and allowed the appeal by remanding the matter for fresh adjudication. The tribunal held that the CBEC circular could not override tariff hierarchy or justify treating dioctyl orthophthalates as distinct from dioctyl phthalate; the adjudicator failed to discharge the onus of proving unambiguous classification under the residuary sub-heading. The case was remitted for re-examination of classification under GRI rules and for scrutiny/clarification of the CRCL test report before determining duty, interest and penalty. en-us Tue, 16 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 27 Sep 2025 08:34:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779057 CESTAT set aside the adjudicating order and allowed the appeal by remanding the matter for fresh adjudication. The tribunal held that the CBEC circular could not override tariff hierarchy or justify treating dioctyl orthophthalates as distinct from dioctyl phthalate; the adjudicator failed to discharge the onus of proving unambiguous classification under the residuary sub-heading. The case was remitted for re-examination of classification under GRI rules and for scrutiny/clarification of the CRCL test report before determining duty, interest and penalty. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 16 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779057